Over
the
weekend,
a
federal
judge
issued
a
significant
ruling
in
Particle
Health’s
antitrust
lawsuit
against
Epic,
allowing
key
claims
to
proceed
while
dismissing
others.
Judge
Naomi
Buchwald
of
the
Southern
District
of
New
York
permitted
three
of
Particle’s
federal
antitrust
claims
to
move
forward,
as
well
as
a
claim
of
tortious
interference
with
business
contracts.
Data
platform
Particle
filed
the
lawsuit
against
EHR
behemoth
Epic
last
September
following
a
monthslong
dispute.
The
startup’s
complaint
alleged
that
the
EHR
vendor
is
using
its
dominance
in
the
market
to
prevent
competition
in
the
payer
platform
space.
The
payer
platform
space
refers
to
the
emerging
market
for
digital
platforms
that
allow
payers
to
access
and
analyze
patient
data
at
scale
for
a
variety
of
purposes,
including
improving
care
coordination,
designing
population
health
programs
or
streamlining
claims
processing.
Particle’s
complaint
alleges
that
Epic
is
preventing
the
startup
from
competing
in
this
space
by
blocking
Particle
customers
from
retrieving
Epic-held
data.
At
the
center
of
the
dispute
is
Carequality,
a
nationwide
data
exchange
framework
that
Epic
plays
a
dominant
role
in
operating.
Particle
relies
on
Carequality
to
retrieve
patient
records
on
behalf
of
its
customers,
but
the
startup
alleges
that
Epic
has
selectively
restricted
its
access,
therefore
cutting
it
off
from
a
crucial
pipeline
of
clinical
data.
Particle
argues
that
Epic
has
leveraged
its
influence
over
Carequality
to
tilt
the
market
in
its
favor
and
shut
out
the
competition
—
saying
that
this
behavior
amounts
to
an
“unprecedented”
exertion
of
market
power
that
suppresses
innovation
and
controls
payers’
access
to
patient
records.
The
company
alleges
that
Epic’s
tactics
have
driven
customers
to
abandon
their
contracts,
as
well
prevent
new
customer
relationships
from
forming.
In
her
September
5
ruling,
Buchwald
said
that
Particle
had
provided
credible
information
to
back
up
its
claims
that
Epic
engaged
in
anticompetitive
behavior
—
enough
to
avoid
the
case’s
outright
dismissal
at
this
preliminary
stage.
She
did,
however,
dismiss
several
claims
alleging
that
Epic
engaged
in
conspiracy,
defamation
and
trade
libel.
Particle
CEO
Jason
Prestinario
said
he
is
“very
pleased”
about
Buchwald’s
ruling
in
a
LinkedIn
post.
“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.
This
is
the
first
time
in
Epic’s
history
that
an
antitrust
case
against
them
has
gotten
to
this
point.
It’s
the
next
step
to
a
bigger
victory
for
better
patient
care
and
more
patient
control
of
their
medical
info,”
he
wrote.
An
Epic
spokesperson
sent
a
statement
to
MedCity
News
noting
that
the
company
is
looking
forward
to
the
next
stage
of
the
legal
process.
“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.’
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,”
the
spokesperson
wrote.
The
next
step
for
the
parties
is
the
discovery
phase,
which
could
shed
new
light
on
how
data
sharing
rules
are
enforced
and
what’s
at
stake
for
the
future
of
payer
platforms.
Photo:
Andrii
Sedykh,
Getty
Images