In a letter to Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald this past week, Epic requested a pre-motion conference in support of its anticipated motion to dismiss Particle Health Inc. v. Epic Systems Corporation, a lawsuit Particle Health filed in the Southern District of New York last month.
WHY IT MATTERS
The October 15 letter to the court detailed what legal representative Lauren Moskowitz, partner at Cravath, Swaine & Moore called “core legal flaws” in the antitrust lawsuit, which alleges that Epic used its influence in the Carequality interoperability framework to block some of Particle’s provider customers.
Moskowitz detailed a number of “deficiencies” in the complaint and accused Particle Health of “factual misstatements.”
She said Particle failed to plead a relevant product market, anticompetitive conduct, conspiracy, antitrust standing and more, attributing the data exchange and analytics company’s complaint to a sour response over a corrective action plan.
After detecting suspicious activity, Epic said it initiated a Carequality dispute in March.
In June, Particle terminated its contracts with two of three organizations involved in the dispute, and they are also no longer Carequality Connections – terminated for 12 months.
“Instead of accepting responsibility, Particle launched this baseless lawsuit under the incredible notion that Epic violated the Sherman Act by initiating the agreed Carequality process and taking other steps to ensure that patient privacy was being protected,” Moskowitz said in the letter.
THE LARGER TREND
The sparring between Epic and Particle Health snared the Carequality network ahead of the dispute resolution process’ completion.
But in a statement regarding the conclusion of that process, the network noted that Epic claimed Particle Health was “masking,” the ID of customers behind the Particle Health gateway.
“This claim highlighted differences in interpretation of certain Carequality technical requirements,” Carequality said. “With the assistance of a subject matter expert, it was demonstrated that Particle Health was not using a ‘masking gateway.'”
ON THE RECORD
“This lawsuit is Particle’s attempt to distract from the public reckoning stemming from Particle’s customers violating patient privacy by improperly accessing patient records for non-treatment purposes,” said Epic’s legal representative in the letter.
“We are confident our antitrust complaint will survive Epic’s motion to dismiss,” a Particle Health spokesperson told Healthcare IT News by email on Friday. “Our suit describes in a detailed, fact-based manner how Epic Systems uses its monopoly power over Americans’ personal health information to stifle competition.”
Andrea Fox is senior editor of Healthcare IT News.
Email: afox@himss.org
Healthcare IT News is a HIMSS Media publication.