Epic to face key antitrust claims in ongoing lawsuit

A federal judge has allowed parts of Particle Health’s antitrust lawsuit against EHR vendor Epic Systems to move forward, while dismissing other claims.

Here are 10 things to know about the case:

1. Particle Health, a health data exchange startup based in New York City, sued the EHR giant in September 2024, accusing Epic of monopolization, attempted monopolization, tortious interference and defamation. Epic, based in Verona, Wis., moved to dismiss the case.
2. Particle claimed Epic sought to block its growth by suspending access to electronic records for dozens of its customers, slowing approvals for new clients and issuing public statements that portrayed Particle as a privacy and security risk.
3. Particle argued that Epic’s conduct caused customers to terminate contracts and discouraged new business.
4. Epic denied the allegations, contending it acted to protect patient data and enforce Carequality, a nationwide health information exchange framework that allows participating organizations to securely share data. The company argued Particle allowed customers to mislabel record requests and used a gateway that masked the identity of organizations retrieving records.
5. A Carequality steering committee later found some of Particle’s clients had improperly requested records for non-treatment purposes and required Particle to adopt a corrective action plan.
6. In a Sept. 5 memorandum and order obtained by Becker’s, Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York ruled that the health data exchange startup plausibly alleged Epic engaged in anticompetitive conduct in the market for “payer platforms,” software that allows insurers to retrieve and analyze electronic health records at scale.
7. Epic launched its Epic Payer Platform in 2021, while Particle entered the payer market in 2023.
8. Judge Buchwald dismissed Particle’s Section 1 Sherman Act claim, finding the startup had not sufficiently alleged Epic entered into illegal agreements with other parties. However, she allowed claims under Section 2 of the Sherman Act — covering monopolization and attempted monopolization — to proceed, along with some state law claims.
9. “The court dismissed the majority of Particle’s claims. The ruling included the observation that Carequality’s ‘imposition of the corrective action plan [on Particle] was entirely reasonable,’” an Epic spokesperson wrote to Becker’s in an emailed statement. “Epic has worked and will continue to work to protect the privacy of patients’ data. We look forward to the opportunity to present evidence to prevail on the remaining claims.”
10. “Very pleased at the outcome that came out last night in our antitrust case against Epic,” Particle Health CEO Jason Prestinario wrote on LinkedIn. “While a few of the claims didn’t survive, Epic’s motion to dismiss was DENIED on all 3 of the core monopolization antitrust claims.”

The post Epic to face key antitrust claims in ongoing lawsuit appeared first on Becker’s Hospital Review | Healthcare News & Analysis.