Epic Pushes Back Against Particle Health as Antitrust Case Intensifies

Epic Systems is ramping up its efforts to have the antitrust lawsuit filed by startup Particle Health dismissed, striking back against the counterarguments presented earlier this month. The legal clash, which centers on allegations of monopolistic practices, continues to draw attention as Particle fights to keep its claims alive in court.

In December, Epic filed a motion to dismiss Particle’s lawsuit, arguing that the startup failed to define a relevant antitrust market and provide plausible evidence of anticompetitive behavior. Particle responded on January 9 with a detailed 46-page rebuttal, accusing Epic of stifling competition in the payer-platform market. Now, Epic is firing back, maintaining that the lawsuit is baseless and should not proceed.

Epic Responds to Particle’s Counterarguments

According to Fierce Healthcare, Epic has doubled down on its position that Particle’s claims do not meet the legal standard for an antitrust case. The health IT giant argues that Particle has not demonstrated harm to competition, nor has it sufficiently defined the market in question. Epic also asserts that its own and Particle’s offerings are far from the only options available for payers seeking access to health records.

In its motion to dismiss, Epic highlighted competing solutions from companies such as Datavant, InterSystems’ HealthShare, and Availity, all of which it says serve similar purposes in the payer interoperability space. The company contends that the existence of these alternatives undermines Particle’s accusations of monopolistic behavior.

Epic has also rejected Particle’s claims of defamatory statements and customer threats, dismissing them as unsupported and irrelevant to antitrust law.

Related: Epic Health Systems Seeks Dismissal of Antitrust Suit Filed by Particle Health

Particle’s Claims Against Epic

Particle’s lawsuit, filed in September, accuses Epic of leveraging its dominance in the electronic health record (EHR) market—where it holds a 36% share—to block competition in the emerging payer-platform market. The startup alleges that Epic has made it commercially impossible for other payer platforms to access patient records stored in its EHR systems, effectively barring potential competitors from entering the market.

In its January 9 filing, Particle argued that Epic’s alleged actions are aimed at eliminating competition from innovative startups like itself. The company accused Epic of threatening customers who work with Particle and spreading false statements about the startup to further entrench its market dominance.

“Epic can try to defend its actions at the appropriate time, but it identifies no basis to dismiss the Complaint now. The motion should be denied,” Particle wrote in its counterargument, as cited by Fierce Healthcare.

The Stakes in the Payer-Platform Market

At the heart of the case is the competition to control payer-platform technology, a growing sector that facilitates access to patient data for purposes such as population health management and claims processing. Particle expanded its services to payers last year, seeking to bring its data aggregation platform to organizations that blend payer and provider roles, or “pay-viders.”

Particle contends that its approach aligns with HIPAA regulations and health information network rules, allowing payers to leverage patient data for secondary uses. Epic, however, views these claims as insufficient grounds for an antitrust challenge.

What’s Next?

The ongoing legal filings signal a protracted battle between the two companies, with both sides presenting sharply contrasting narratives. Epic continues to insist that Particle’s lawsuit lacks the necessary legal foundation to proceed, while Particle argues it has provided detailed evidence of monopolistic behavior.

The court’s decision on Epic’s motion to dismiss will likely shape the trajectory of the case and could have broader implications for competition and innovation in the health IT industry. Per Fierce Healthcare, this legal battle highlights the critical importance of interoperability and access to patient data in shaping the future of healthcare technology.

Source: Fierce Healthcare