In a significant legal development, JDJournal reports that U.S. District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald has allowed a substantial portion of an antitrust lawsuit filed by Particle Health to move forward against Epic Systems—a dominant force in healthcare electronic health records (EHR). This ruling, delivered in the Southern District of New York, marks a pivotal moment in a high-stakes case with implications for competition, cost, and patient data access.
What the Court Said
Judge Buchwald ruled that Particle Health successfully presented sufficient allegations to warrant a continued legal challenge under the federal Sherman Antitrust Act. Specifically, the court found credibly demonstrated “anticompetitive” conduct aimed at pushing Particle aside from the emerging payer-platform market. However, the judge dismissed several secondary counts, including claims of defamation, trade libel, and business interference.
Backdrop: Epic’s Market Dominance
Epic, which maintains electronic medical records for up to 94% of Americans, stands as a powerhouse in healthcare data. Particle Health, a startup founded in 2018, offers a “payer” software platform that enables health insurers to access and manage EHR information. Particle alleges that Epic leveraged its dominant position to discourage clients from using Particle’s platform and create barriers to new partnerships.
Legal Stakes and Scopes
The denial of the full dismissal means Epic must now participate in discovery—the legal phase where both sides exchange relevant documents and evidence. Epic must turn over internal communications and data that could substantiate or refute claims of monopolistic behavior targeting Particle.
Particle’s CEO, Jason Prestinario, welcomed the decision, calling it a crucial milestone toward “better patient care and more patient control of their medical info.” Epic, meanwhile, takes a measured approach—underscoring that most claims were dismissed and expressing confidence in presenting evidence to win on the remaining issues.
Broader Implications for the Health Tech Ecosystem
Epic’s EHR dominance—while enabling streamlined data management—raises serious competition and innovation concerns. If the monopolization claims proceed successfully, it could reshape how health data platforms operate, potentially opening the market to more affordable, interoperable solutions. This case underscores broader policy debates over antitrust enforcement in the digital health space.
Particle alleges that Epic made it “commercially impossible” for other payer platforms to penetrate its ecosystem—effectively stifling competition even as healthcare evolves toward data-driven services. A positive outcome for Particle could set precedent for startups challenging entrenched digital infrastructure players.
JDJournal Insight: Why This Ruling Matters to Law Professionals
- Antitrust Law in the Tech Era: Legal professionals should watch how courts apply Sherman Act principles to digital healthcare platforms, especially where proprietary data systems intersect with downstream market access.
- Rising Stakes for Legal Strategy: With discovery looming, both Epic and Particle must prepare methodically—this case is about more than precedent; it’s about access to data, patient services, and competitive fairness.
- Patient Impact and Regulatory Ripples: Beyond financial and competitive consequences, this litigation touches on access to medical records, interoperability rights, and consumer protections—areas increasingly central in healthcare law.
What Happens Next?
The case—Particle Health Inc. v. Epic Systems Corp., docket number 1:24-cv-07174—now enters a phase of document discovery and fact-gathering. Legal teams on both sides will present internal communications, contracts, and data that could confirm or refute allegations of anticompetitive behavior.
As the lawsuit evolves, JDJournal will keep you updated on major developments—from motion outcomes and discovery turnarounds to the potential for settlement or a full trial.
Final Thought
This ruling underscores a core principle: even dominant players like Epic must defend their practices under antitrust scrutiny. For lawyers, regulators, and healthcare innovators alike, the message is clear—no company is immune from accountability, and technology-driven sectors must remain fair, competitive, and accessible.
