Around the weekend, a federal judge issued a significant decision in the antimonopoly demand of Partic Health against Epic, allowing key claims to process while dismissing others.
Judge Naomi Buchwald of the Southern District of New York allowed three of the federal antimonopoly claims to advance, as well as a claim of tortuous interference with commercial contracts.
The data platform presented filed the lawsuit against EHR Behemoth Epic last September after a month dispute. The Startup complaint claimed that the EHR supplier is using its market domain to avoid competition in the paid platform space.
The paid platform space refers to the emerging market of digital platforms that allow payers to access and analyze the data of patients at a scale for a variety of purposes, including the improvement of the coordination of care, the design of population programs or the rationalization of claims processing.
The Party complaint alleges that Epic is preventing the startup from competing in this space by blocking private clients to recover data from Epic hero.
In the center of the dispute is Carequality, a framework for national data exchange that Epic plays a dominant role in the operation. Part is based on the folder to recover patient records on the name of customers, but the startup alleges that Epic has selectively restricted its access, therefore, cutting it from a crucial portfolio of clinical data.
Participate argues that Epic has taken advantage of its influence on cardia to incline the market in its favor and exclude competition, saying that behavior is equivalent to an “unprecedented” effort of the market power it records. The company alleges that Epic’s tactics have led customers to leave their contracts, and also prevent new relations with customers from being formed.
In his failure of September 5, Buchwald said that particle had provided credible information to support his statements that Epic participated in anti -competitive behavior, enough to avoid the direct dismissal of the case in this preliminary stage. However, he dismissed several statements claiming that Epic dedicated himself to conspiracy, defamation and commercial defamation.
The particular CEO, Jason Borrowing, said he is “very happy” about Buchwald’s decision in a LinkedIn post.
“While some of the statements did not survive, the motion of dismissal of EPIC was denied in the 3 antimolization claims of central monopolization. This is the first time in the history of Epic that an antimonopoly case against them has Godes for the name of this skating. Patient control or medical information,” Hey.
An epic spokesman sent a statement to Medcity news Pointing out that the company expects the next stage of the legal process.
“The Court dismissed most of the claim claims. The ruling included the observation that the imposition of the care of the corrective action plan [on Particle] It was completely reasonable. “Epic has worked and will continue to work to protect the privacy of patient data. We expect the opportunity to present evidence to prevail on the statement of remotety,” the spokesman wrote.
The next step for the parties is the discovery phase, which could shed a new light on how data exchange rules are applied and what is at stake for the future of payer platforms.
Photo: Andrii Sedykh, Getty Images