SAN FRANCISCO – March 5, 2026 – A federal court today held a hearing on Comulate's motion to protect customer access to Comulate beyond Applied Systems' self-imposed June 2026 deadline. The court did not grant an injunction today but stated it is open to a renewed motion seeking an injunction preventing Applied from cutting off customers' access after June and ordered expedited discovery to support a renewed motion.

The court found that portions of Applied's communications directing customers to cease using Comulate likely constitute tortious interference and a violation of California’s Unfair Competition Law. The court also identified a core factual question to resolve before granting further relief: whether customer behavior is attributable to Applied's interference as opposed to independent customer judgment. To develop the record for our motion, including on that question, the court ordered Applied to produce documents related to its customer communications on an expedited two-week timeline, invited Comulate to refile its motion immediately upon receiving those documents, and committed to ruling as quickly as possible. Comulate intends to refile and seek a renewed ruling by the end of March.

The factual record underlying that question is extensive. Over the past four months, Applied sent customers accusations of IP theft that were later dropped from its own complaint, that customers would be in breach of their agreements if they continued using Comulate, represented that courts had ordered a transition off Comulate that no court ordered, imposed a June 30 deadline of its own creation, and steered customers toward its own and its affiliates' inferior competing products.

Correcting Applied's Mischaracterizations

Applied has once again misrepresented the outcome of a court proceeding to its own customers: 

1) Applied claims "the judge did not support the merits of their antitrust claims." The court stated that it has not reached any conclusion about antitrust liability. Comulate did not press its antitrust claims as part of the injunction motion. The court made no ruling on those claims, and they remain fully pending.

2) Applied claims it was "permitted only limited discovery on a contract claim." The discovery the court ordered is on Comulate's tortious interference claims, specifically Applied's communications with its own customers, not on Applied's contract claims. The court granted this discovery about Applied’s tortious acts specifically to support a renewed injunction protecting customer access.

3) Applied says the court "defeated Comulate's request to extend Epic integration." The court said, in its own words, that it is open to that relief and needs additional evidence before granting it.

‍

Here is the transcript of the court proceeding; Court's minute order is reproduced verbatim below:

^{“MINUTE entry before the Honorable Manish S. Shah: Telephone status hearing held. The motion for leave to file exhibit under seal [72] is granted. Docket Entry [72-1] shall remain under seal and plaintiff has leave to file a new public version with the correct redactions. For the reasons stated on the record, plaintiff's motion to expedite discovery [10] is granted in part and denied in part. Plaintiff may serve Interrogatory No. 3 and Document Request No. 3 for the time period of October, 2025 through January 19, 2026. Defendant shall respond by 3/19/26. No depositions are permitted. The motion for entry of temporary restraining order is denied. Plaintiff has leave to file a renewed motion for preliminary injunction when prepared to do so. Notices Mailed. (psm, ) (Entered: 03/05/2026).”} 

About Comulate
Comulate is the technology company leveraging AI to transform the insurance industry. Powering the largest insurance brokers, Comulate's category-defining accounting automation eliminates 90%+ of manual work, creating a radically exciting future for the insurance back office.
‍

Media Contact
press@comulate.com