Home Court Disadvantaged?

[

](https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/$s_!YFiz!,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Fd2ea61eb-28fd-4b0b-8008-e8adcd88565c_1344x768.jpeg)

Epic (via Cravath) has largely fended off its growing onslaught of lawsuits deftly, but its strategy came back to bite it a bit in the CureIS case last week:

The court held a telephonic preliminary pretrial conference on February 11, 2026. Both sides were represented by counsel. The court heard argument on the motion to stay discovery, the joint motion for protective order, and a request regarding the unsealing of certain information. For the reasons discussed: The motion to stay, Dkt. 83, is DENIED. The joint motion for protective order, Dkt. 112, is GRANTED as follows: The court adopted defendant's proposed language for who gets to view information designated "Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only," with the modification that defendant may designate only one outside counsel that meets the definition. The parties are ORDERED to revise their proposed order and resubmit it for the court's approval. In doing so, they should address these points: Paragraphs 2.a and 2.f should not use the phrase "it reasonably determines in good faith," to comply with Citizens First Nat. Bank of Princeton v. Cincinnati Ins. Co., 178 F.3d 943, 945 (7th Cir. 1999), which requires definitions concerning confidentiality to be objective, not subjective. Paragraph 15 should reference Administrative Order No. 337. Finally, defendant raised an issue with the unsealing of information contained in the pleadings and briefing on the motion to dismiss. In short, a customer name was redacted when these materials were originally filed because it was not publicly known then, but the information has since been made public. The parties are ORDERED to meet and confer to identify materials they can file in a lesser-redacted form and to file new versions using the "Redacted" event. The court also set the schedule, to issue in a separate order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor on 2/12/2026. (lam) (Entered: 02/12/2026)

[

Epic (via Cravath) has largely fended off its growing onslaught of lawsuits deftly, but its strategy came back to bite it a bit in the CureIS case last week:

The court held a telephonic preliminary pretrial conference on February 11, 2026. Both sides were represented by counsel. The court heard argument on the motion to stay discovery, the joint motion for protective order, and a request regarding the unsealing of certain information. For the reasons discussed: The motion to stay, Dkt. 83, is DENIED. The joint motion for protective order, Dkt. 112, is GRANTED as follows: The court adopted defendant's proposed language for who gets to view information designated "Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only," with the modification that defendant may designate only one outside counsel that meets the definition. The parties are ORDERED to revise their proposed order and resubmit it for the court's approval. In doing so, they should address these points: Paragraphs 2.a and 2.f should not use the phrase "it reasonably determines in good faith," to comply with Citizens First Nat. Bank of Princeton v. Cincinnati Ins. Co., 178 F.3d 943, 945 (7th Cir. 1999), which requires definitions concerning confidentiality to be objective, not subjective. Paragraph 15 should reference Administrative Order No. 337. Finally, defendant raised an issue with the unsealing of information contained in the pleadings and briefing on the motion to dismiss. In short, a customer name was redacted when these materials were originally filed because it was not publicly known then, but the information has since been made public. The parties are ORDERED to meet and confer to identify materials they can file in a lesser-redacted form and to file new versions using the "Redacted" event. The court also set the schedule, to issue in a separate order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor on 2/12/2026. (lam) (Entered: 02/12/2026)

Healthcare Pulse

Why It Matters

Ask Pulse AI: