Our Position on the Veeva Litigation

At IQVIA, we believe that better information lies at the heart of a better world, especially in healthcare. We continually work to enable collaboration across the healthcare industry and expand access to the information and insights that advance global health. In recent years, IQVIA has issued more than a quarter of a million Third Party Access (TPA) licenses to thousands of vendors to access and use IQVIA data. As part of this mission, we champion the laws that help our industry protect intellectual property and handle sensitive health information with trust and integrity.  

Unfortunately, Veeva has illegally obtained IQVIA proprietary data from client files, unlawfully used the data in its own products, and destroyed massive amounts of documents related to this legal dispute in an effort to cover-up its illegal conduct. These are serious issues, and we want to make sure our customers and other stakeholders understand the facts. This site contains important information and context about our litigation against Veeva. We will keep it updated as key developments in this legal process occur.

Status of the Case

• On May 7, 2021, the U.S. District Court of New Jersey issued a favorable decision on IQVIA’s motion for sanctions in IQVIA’s litigation against Veeva Systems.
• The Court found Veeva stole IQVIA proprietary data from client files, engaged in the massive destruction of evidence to hide its theft, engaged in a cover-up of its wrong-doing, and repeatedly lied about its actions.
• The court sanctioned Veeva five separate times in the decision to punish Veeva for its destruction of evidence and other violations of rules in the litigation, including multiple adverse jury instructions, limitations on the use of evidence at trial and an award of legal fees and costs.
• Specific language from the decision includes:
  • Engaging Fraud & Destruction of Evidence
    “IQVIA has made a prima facie showing that Veeva was engaging or intended to engage in a crime or fraud at the time the DataDestroyed Spreadsheet was created and that the DataDestroyed Spreadsheet was used in furtherance of the alleged crime or fraud – namely, the spoliation of evidence.” 
  • Veeva Misappropriation of IQVIA Intellectual Property
    “[T]here is no dispute that IQVIA Reference Data was “programmatically” included in Veeva OpenData.”
  • Theft & Intentional Cover-Up
    “The OpenData Data Corruption Memo indicates that Veeva was well-aware that it was misappropriating IQVIA data, something the [independent] Audit would uncover, and that the incident could lead to litigation. Rather than disclose the allegedly “minor” [client] Incident to IQVIA or the auditors, Veeva chose to cover it up, deleting evidence and directing employees not to create further evidence on the subject (such as replacing “IMS” with “***” in e-mails, not discussing the situation in chats or e-mails, and deleting chats or e-mails where the incident was discussed).”
• This decision on IQVIA’s motion for sanctions is not a final decision in the case. A trial is expected after 2023.  A court will issue its ruling after the trial.
• IQVIA will continue to pursue our claims in court and we look forward to successfully resolving our ongoing litigation for the benefit of our clients around the world and reaffirming protections for intellectual property, innovation and investment.

Timeline

• 2013: Veeva launched Veeva Network, a solution combining data, technology, and services.  Shortly afterwards, Veeva announced it would improve the reference data in Veeva Network by “crowdsourcing” data across the industry from IQVIA and others by extracting that data from Veeva CRM and making that data available through Veeva Network. Many organizations objected to this “crowdsourcing” concept proposed by Veeva. After several months, Veeva claimed to abandon the concept.
• 2014: Veeva gave high level assurances to IQVIA and clients that it could be trusted with IQVIA market research data in Veeva Network, but failed to share any details. IQVIA engaged in many exchanges with Veeva to better understand their Veeva Network system, but because Veeva did not substantively address IQVIA's concerns those exchanges did not bring any results.
• 2015: Veeva officially announced its intention to offer reference data in many countries under the brand “OpenKey,” knowing this brand name would infringe on IQVIA’s “OneKey” trademark. Veeva changed the name to Opendata only after IQVIA filed a lawsuit.
• 2016: One of the “Big Four” global audit firms completed an independent assessment of the high-level assurances Veeva had been giving to IQVIA and clients that IQVIA data would be protected from misuse. The assessment showed Veeva’s assurances to be false. A leading digital security firm confirmed this conclusion. Veeva rejected these conclusions, assured clients that no significant issues existed and claimed IQVIA was only denying TPA licenses to block competition. In this same year, a pharmaceutical company reported Veeva misused IQVIA data, but Veeva refused to share details about the incident. Veeva admitted this type of misuse had occurred many times before.
• January 2017: Based on these and other incidents, IQVIA filed a lawsuit against Veeva for theft of IQVIA market research data from around the world and unlawful use of the data by Veeva to improve its own offerings and sales practices.
• March 2017: Veeva responded to IQVIA’s lawsuit with baseless antitrust counterclaims. A few months later, both companies filed procedural motions to dismiss each other’s claims, but the court denied both motions and lets the litigation proceed on all claims.
• July 2019: IQVIA filed a second lawsuit against Veeva. Veeva filed a lawsuit against IQVIA the next day.
• February 2020: IQVIA filed a motion alerting the court to the massive destruction of evidence by Veeva and asking the Court to impose serious sanctions on Veeva for their outrageous conduct.
• May 2021:  The court issued its decision granting IQVIA’s sanctions motion.

Resources

• Court decision - May 7, 2021
• Annotated Court Decision - May 7, 2021
• U.S. District Court Issues Favorable Decision for IQVIA Against Veeva - BioSpace - May 10, 2021
• Disputing the Facts: Is the Legal Battle Between Veeva and IQVIA an Antitrust Issue? - Pharma Technology Focus
• IQVIA Holdings Inc Says U.S. District Court Of New Jersey Issued A Favorable Decision In Its Litigation With Veeva Systems Inc - May 10, 2021