OpenEvidence Inc., a medical artificial intelligence startup, along with competitors Doximity Inc. and Pathway Medical Inc., have informed a Massachusetts federal judge of a preliminary settlement agreement to resolve a contentious lawsuit and counterclaim. The litigation, initiated by OpenEvidence in June 2025, accused Doximity and its Chief Technology Officer, Jey Balachandran, and Director of AI Products, Jake Konoske, of unauthorized access to OpenEvidence’s AI medical information platform. The amended complaint, filed in October 2025, expanded the allegations to include Doximity’s subsidiary, Pathway Medical, and several individuals, asserting violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and trespass to chattels. ([sec.gov](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1516513/000151651326000034/annualreporttoshareholder-.pdf?utm_source=openai))
In response, Doximity and Pathway Medical filed counterclaims alleging false advertising under the Lanham Act, violations of the Massachusetts Consumer Protection Law, and common law defamation. The court dismissed OpenEvidence’s trespass to chattels claim and Pathway’s Lanham Act and Massachusetts Chapter 93A counterclaims in January 2026, allowing other claims and counterclaims to proceed. ([sec.gov](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1516513/000151651326000034/annualreporttoshareholder-.pdf?utm_source=openai))
The settlement comes amid a broader context of legal disputes involving OpenEvidence. In November 2025, OpenEvidence settled a similar lawsuit against Veracity Health Inc., which was accused of violating terms of service to gain improper access to OpenEvidence’s medical-AI product. ([news.bloomberglaw.com](https://news.bloomberglaw.com/business-and-practice/openevidence-settles-ai-prompt-hack-suit-against-veracity-health?utm_source=openai))
The terms of the current settlement between OpenEvidence, Doximity, and Pathway Medical have not been disclosed. The parties have indicated that they expect to finalize the agreement within 30 days. This resolution may have significant implications for the competitive landscape of medical AI platforms, as these companies continue to navigate the complex interplay between innovation and intellectual property rights.