SYMPHONY HEALTH SOLUTIONS CORPORATION et al v. IMS HEALTH INCORPORATED, No. 2:2013cv04290 - Document 83 (E.D. Pa. 2014)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM AND OPINION. SIGNED BY HONORABLE GERALD A. MCHUGH ON 10/6/14. 10/6/14 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED, E-MAILED.(fdc)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
SYMPHONY HEALTH SOLUTIONS CORPORATION et al v. IMS HEALTH INCORPORATED Doc. 83 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA SYMPHONY HEALTH SOLUTIONS CORPORATION, ET AL. Plaintiffs, v. IMS HEALTH INCORPORATED Defendant. : : : : : : : : CIVIL ACTION No. 13-4290 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER McHugh, J. October 6, 2014 In an Order entered August 15, 2014, I dismissed certain of IMS Counterclaims, including Count VIII for tortious interference with IMS contract with a de-identification vendor, MSA. Because there are allegations involving MSA elsewhere in the various Counterclaims, Plaintiff Symphony now purportedly asks for clarification of my Order, and specifically whether I also intended to dismiss IMS counterclaims I, II, and IX to the extent those claims are based on plaintiffs relationship with a particular vendor. The answer, in a word, is: No. Counterclaim VIII was dismissed because IMS failed to plead, in a plausible way, an essential element of its claim actual harm from contractual interference alleging instead only the inevitably of future harm. Dismissal of the claim on that basis hardly renders other dealings between Symphony and MSA factually irrelevant. Counterclaims I, II, and IX allege that plaintiffs engaged in a pattern of wrongful conduct to appropriate defendants trade secrets and proprietary information, and includes among the facts pled specific allegations concerning MSA. To the extent that such facts are proven and demonstrate unlawful conduct, they are fairly part of the case. Stated differently, IMS failure to sustain one particular claim regarding Dockets.Justia.com Symphony s dealings with MSA is not dispositive of other claims sufficiently pled, even if those claims arise out of the same or similar factual allegations. Based on the above exposition of the Court s analysis, Symphony s Motion for Clarification is DENIED as MOOT. /s/ Gerald Austin McHugh United States District Court Judge
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
