loanDepot.com, LLC v. CrossCountry Mortgage, LLC

Background

loanDepot moved for reconsideration of Judge Schofield’s May 16, 2023 order allowing CrossCountry to submit a supplemental brief. The supplemental briefing concerned loanDepot’s pending request for a preliminary injunction. The opinion text includes loanDepot’s letter application and the court’s notation ruling on that application.

loanDepot argued that CrossCountry’s proposed supplemental filing was essentially an improper late reply brief. It also argued that the evidence CrossCountry described as new—concerning loanDepot’s hiring practices, employees’ alleged handling of borrower contact information, and the meaning of contractual confidential-information terms—had already been raised or was already known. loanDepot further argued that the material concerned unrelated conduct by nonparties and did not relate to the trade secrets or individual contractual obligations at issue.

loanDepot alternatively requested permission to file a response to CrossCountry’s supplemental submission and to present additional evidence that defendants had produced after the preliminary-injunction motion was filed.

Ruling

The court marked the application “DENIED.” It stated that CrossCountry’s supplemental brief would be disregarded to the extent the offered “new evidence” was not new or relevant. The court also stated that loanDepot’s letter would be considered in making that determination.

This order addressed the handling of supplemental briefing and evidence. The provided text does not state a ruling on the underlying request for a preliminary injunction, nor does it state a separate disposition of loanDepot’s alternative request for permission to file a responsive brief and additional evidence.