SYMPHONY HEALTH SOLUTIONS CORPORATION et al v. IMS HEALTH INCORPORATED

Filing 84

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER THAT SYMPHONY'S MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION IS DENIED AS MOOT. SIGNED BY HONORABLE GERALD A. MCHUGH ON 10/6/14. 10/6/14 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED, E-MAILED.(fdc)

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

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