On Oct. 17, the brokerage filed an appeal in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, in hopes of another outcome.

This move comes after a Florida federal court judge dismissed the brokerage's initial complaint with prejudice in late September, meaning the door was kept open for Okavage to refile a complaint if it so desired.

Judge Wendy W. Berger, overseeing the case, said the reason for the dismissal stemmed from the plaintiffs' failure to adequately plead antitrust and unfair trade accusations. Her ruling echoed earlier findings of a lower magistrate judge.

Okavage's dismissed suit alleges UWM violated the Sherman Antitrust Act, the Florida Antitrust Act, Tortious Interference with Business Relationships and Florida's Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act.

UWM declined to comment Friday. An attorney representing the Florida-based brokerage could not be reached.

Berger, in her ruling, wrote that numerous arguments by Okavage didn't meet legal standards, such as the brokerage's allegation of "vertical agreements between UWM and many of its brokers."

"With respect to communications, plaintiff has failed to make any non conclusory, factual allegations that support an inference that the brokers that agreed to the ultimatum would have not agreed absent an understanding that the other brokers would follow suit," Berger said.

Berger also notes that U.S. Magistrate Judge Laura Lothman Lambert, who was the first to recommend a dismissal of the case, did consider Okavage's allegations regarding how the All-In initiative would harm brokers as evidence of harming competition, but that this argument necessitated more context. Berger agrees, she wrote.

Okavage's complaint, filed April 23, 2021, was the first to challenge UWM's ultimatum, but not the last. America's Moneyline is another brokerage legally challenging the wholesale lender's initiative. In late September, UWM cited the dismissal of Okavage's suit as evidence that the Michigan court should also throw out AML's complaint.

Litigation with AML began when UWM sued it for allegedly working with Rocket Pro TPO, in violation of the ultimatum the brokerage signed in 2021. UWM claims its broker partner originated at least 560 loans with Rocket, accruing a $2.8 million penalty according to calculations from the agreement. 

The brokerage countersued for fraud, claiming UWM managers assured them there would be no repercussions for violating the mandate before reneging and suing.

UWM is suing three other brokerages for violating its All-In mandate. The suits remain pending in federal courts. It also reached a $40,000 settlement agreement with Mid Valley Funding in a lawsuit over its alleged breach of UWM's agreement.