CuLM2 would be Auger peak naming (the x-rays excite the L shell, an M shell electron falls down which ionizes another M shell electron), but are you sure about that energy? Here it's 915eV:

Article Insights into the role of surface functional species in Cu-M...

Are you referring to a kinetic energy or a formal binding energy?

Respected Sir synthesized the Cu-Ni, Cu-Fe and Cu-Co nanoparticles. The same binding energy for all nanoparticles was recorded at 570 eV.

One looks usually at Auger peaks in PES on a kinetic energy scale. Because the kinetic energy of the Auger electrons is fixed. When you'd change the excitation source, the apparent binding energy of your Auger peak would change accordingly.

For further information on the interpretation of Cu Auger peaks you should check:

Article Advanced analysis of copper X‐ray photoelectron spectra

Comparing your Cu2p spectrum and your Cu LMM spectrum to the spectra shown there should help you indentify your Cu state. Just from the shape of the Auger peak Cu(OH)2 could be quite likely.