Federal Judge Allows Antitrust Case Against Claritev and Health Insurers to Move Forward

The ruling, issued by Judge Matthew Kennelly of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois Eastern Division, pertains to two consolidated lawsuits brought by healthcare providers. According to a statement from the court, both cases center on allegations that Claritev and its codefendants conspired to drive down out-of-network reimbursement rates through coordinated actions.

We’d love to be your preferred source for news.

Please add us to your preferred sources list so our news, data and interviews show up in your feed. Thanks!

Add as Preferred Source

One of the cases, a class action, names Claritev alongside prominent insurers and managed care organizations, including UnitedHealth Group, Elevance Health, Aetna, and Cigna. A separate, direct action lawsuit adds third-party administrators to the list of defendants. Both cases focus on a platform developed by Claritev that calculates reimbursement rates for out-of-network healthcare services, as well as a related service in which the company negotiates with providers on behalf of insurers in exchange for fees.

Per a statement in the filings, providers argue that the collaboration between Claritev and insurers operates as a form of collusion, allowing payers to exchange sensitive data and collectively suppress payment rates. The providers claim this conduct effectively constitutes a “cartel,” undermining fair compensation for out-of-network care.

Read more: Healthcare Providers Sue BCBS Insurers Over Alleged Collusion

Claritev, for its part, has denied the allegations. The company asserts that its platform relies on publicly accessible data — not proprietary information shared between competitors — to generate rate recommendations for insurers and third-party administrators.

Judge Kennelly’s decision allows the litigation to advance into further stages of discovery and potential trial, a development that could have wide-ranging implications for how insurers and analytics firms influence provider reimbursements. According to a statement from the court, the judge found that the providers’ claims met the necessary threshold to move forward under antitrust and consumer protection laws.

Source: Fierce Health Care