Medimpact Healthcare Systems, Inc. v. IQVIA Holdings Inc.

I. INTRODUCTION

18 Before the Court is the parties’ Joint Motion for Determination of Discovery 19 Dispute. Dkt. No. 319. The dispute concerns Plaintiffs’ Request for Production of 20

22 This dispute implicates Plaintiffs’ Request for Production to: 24 • IQVIA AG, Set Five, RFP Nos. 194–96; • IQVIA Ltd., Set Five, RFP Nos. 193–95; • IQVIA Inc., Set Four, RFP Nos. 184–86; 26 • Dr. Ghosheh, Set Three, RFP Nos. 128–30; and • Mr. Sadana, Set Three, RFP Nos. 131–33. 28 Documents (“RFP”) relating to three of Defendants’ products: (1) Checks for Drugs and Services (“CDS”); (2) Code Checks Engine (“CCE”); and (3) Code Checks Management (“CCM”) (collectively “Disputed Products”). Id. at 4.2 Plaintiffs contend the Disputed Products are relevant to their fiduciary duty, RICO, and conspiracy claims because they “compete directly with [Plaintiffs’] Pharmacy Benefit Management (“PBM”) platform and provide PBM functionality.” Id. at 4. Defendants argue the Disputed Products are irrelevant because they are not PBM technology. Id. at 8. For the reasons set forth below, the Court GRANTS Plaintiffs’…