`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
`INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION
`
`
`)
`
`DR. RICARDO VASQUEZ,
`)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`)
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`)
`
`vs.
`
`
`
`
`)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`INDIANA UNIVERSITY HEALTH, INC., )
`INDIANA UNIVERSITY HEALTH
`)
`BLOOMINGTON, INC., d/b/a
`
`)
`IU HEALTH BLOOMINGTON
`
`)
`HOSPITAL, and DR. DANIEL HANDEL
`)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`)
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`)
`
`Case No. 21-CV-1693
`
`
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
`
`This is a monopolization case about a health system—Indiana University Health, Inc.—
`
`and its subsidiary hospital in Bloomington, Indiana, Indiana University Health Bloomington, Inc.
`
`(collectively, “IU Health”) building a monopoly in primary care services through a series of
`
`anticompetitive acquisitions, and using that monopoly to secure and enhance monopolies over
`
`specialist services, including vascular surgery. As a result, healthcare costs to patients and health
`
`insurance companies (“payors”) in Bloomington have increased, quality of care has decreased,
`
`and some patients are unable to receive care, because the monopolist IU Health sends those
`
`patients to its higher cost sister facilities in Indianapolis or has made the decision not to perform
`
`certain procedures at all.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`1.
`
`IU Health is a monopolist with over 92.5 percent market share of inpatient
`
`discharges in the Bloomington area. In addition, it employs and controls 35 of the 36 family
`
`practice physicians and internists (collectively, “Primary Care Physicians”)—over 97% of the
`
`1
`
`
`
`Case 1:21-cv-01693-JMS-MG Document 1 Filed 06/11/21 Page 2 of 40 PageID #: 2
`
`
`
`total—who have a primary practice location in Bloomington.1 These Primary Care Physicians
`
`refer patients to specialist surgeons who rely on their referrals to receive patients.
`
`2.
`
`IU Health’s largest facility in Southern Indiana is Indiana University Health
`
`Bloomington, Inc. d/b/a IU Health Bloomington Hospital (“Bloomington Hospital”), located in
`
`Bloomington, Indiana. IU Health also owns two critical access hospitals in Southern Indiana—
`
`Indiana University Health Bedford (“IU Health Bedford”) and Indiana University Health Paoli
`
`(“IU Health Paoli”)—and the vast majority of the area physician practices. Finally, IU Health
`
`holds a 45% share in the largest of two area outpatient surgery centers.
`
`3.
`
`Not happy with its high profits and already dominant position in healthcare in
`
`Bloomington, in approximately 2017, IU Health instituted an increasingly aggressive scheme to
`
`acquire nearly all of the Primary Care Physicians in Bloomington. In doing so, it both cemented
`
`its monopoly in primary care services, and it used that monopoly to secure and maintain
`
`monopolies in specialty services. Now, because it controls the physicians who refer to
`
`specialists, and controls many of the specialists as well, IU Health decides where surgeries are
`
`performed and which surgeries are available to area patients, payors, and other healthcare
`
`providers.
`
`4.
`
`As one example, IU Health leveraged its monopoly in primary care services to
`
`monopolize vascular surgery services, a specialty service area. In the past two years, the
`
`percentage of vascular surgeons in the Bloomington area that were employed by IU Health rose
`
`from 50 percent (1 out of 2) to 75 percent (3 out of 4). IU Health’s control over primary care
`
`services forces patients to see the IU Health employed vascular surgeons to their detriment, and
`
`
`1 In the Greater Bloomington Metropolitan Area consisting of the three counties of Greene, Monroe, and Owen, IU
`Health employs approximately 83% of the family practice physicians and internists. It also has a monopoly for nurse
`practitioners, controlling 80% of the nurse practitioners.
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case 1:21-cv-01693-JMS-MG Document 1 Filed 06/11/21 Page 3 of 40 PageID #: 3
`
`
`
`sacrifices patients’ continuity of care. IU Health charges more for patients to see these unfamiliar
`
`vascular surgeons—raising prices to consumers and payors—patients receive lower quality care,
`
`and patients cannot receive certain vascular surgery services altogether from the IU Health
`
`vascular surgeons.
`
`5.
`
`Plaintiff Dr. Ricardo Vasquez is the only independent vascular surgeon left in
`
`Southern Indiana, and the sole obstacle to IU Health obtaining a complete monopoly over
`
`vascular surgery services. Until April 2019, Dr. Vasquez held privileges (allowing him to
`
`perform surgeries) at Bloomington Hospital. Simultaneously, he held privileges at the only other
`
`hospital in town—the much smaller Monroe Hospital—and the Indiana Specialty Surgery
`
`Center, which competes directly with the IU Health-affiliated surgery center. IU Health targeted
`
`Dr. Vasquez because he chose to remain an independent physician, threatening IU Health’s
`
`monopoly over vascular surgery services and its ability to reap monopoly profits. Bloomington
`
`Hospital improperly revoked Dr. Vasquez’s privileges because he threatened IU Health’s
`
`monopoly by competing directly with IU Health: for example, by (1) performing hospital-based
`
`procedures at Monroe; (2) performing procedures at IU Health’s only competitor outpatient
`
`surgery center; and (3) opening an office-based laboratory to compete directly with IU Health in
`
`outpatient vascular surgery services.
`
`6.
`
`IU Health revoked Dr. Vasquez’s privileges in April 2019. In January 2020, IU
`
`Health took a further step in revoking Dr. Vasquez’s credentialing as an IU Health Plan2
`
`participating provider, meaning that IU Health Plan covered patients are forced to pay out of
`
`pocket, at increased cost, to see Dr. Vasquez. Without privileges, Dr. Vasquez cannot perform
`
`surgeries at any IU Health facility, cannot treat any IU Health Plan insured as an in-network
`
`
`2 IU Health Plan is IU Health’s vertically integrated health insurance plan.
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case 1:21-cv-01693-JMS-MG Document 1 Filed 06/11/21 Page 4 of 40 PageID #: 4
`
`
`
`patient, and, critically, cannot receive referrals from IU Health employed or affiliated physicians
`
`without the physicians facing retribution and retaliation from IU Health.3
`
`7.
`
`In addition, and all in an effort to destroy his reputation and practice, IU Health
`
`and its Chief Medical Officer (“CMO”), Dr. Daniel Handel, have maliciously publicized false
`
`statements about Dr. Vasquez, and filed meritless complaints against Dr. Vasquez with the
`
`Indiana Professional Licensing Agency and the Indiana Attorney General in 2020. Neither
`
`agency has determined it proper to pursue an investigation against Dr. Vasquez based on those
`
`complaints.
`
`8.
`
`On information and belief, IU Health and Dr. Handel also are directing the IU
`
`Health employed vascular surgeons to wrongfully and falsely blame any and all missteps in care
`
`on Dr. Vasquez. Because Bloomington Hospital is the only area Level III Trauma Center and the
`
`only area Stroke Center, patients under Dr. Vasquez’s care may end up in the Bloomington
`
`Hospital emergency room and, therefore, be seen by IU Health vascular surgeons. In one recent
`
`instance, Dr. Vasquez had determined to treat a patient medically (i.e., without surgery) because
`
`she had not responded well to surgery in the past. The patient had been stable under Dr.
`
`Vasquez’s care for years. She went to the Bloomington Hospital emergency room with a toe
`
`ulcer. The IU Health vascular surgeons performed two unnecessary surgeries and ultimately had
`
`to amputate her leg. The IU Health vascular surgeons then falsely blamed their poor care on Dr.
`
`Vasquez, in an attempt to harm Dr. Vasquez’s reputation and harm him financially.
`
`9.
`
`Patients have suffered from reduced choice because Dr. Vasquez is well-known as
`
`the most skilled vascular surgeon in the area. He is the only area vascular surgeon performing the
`
`
`3 Surgeons have been retaliated against for referring patients to Dr. Vasquez, as described in more detail below.
`
`4
`
`
`
`Case 1:21-cv-01693-JMS-MG Document 1 Filed 06/11/21 Page 5 of 40 PageID #: 5
`
`
`
`cutting edge and revolutionary vascular procedure, transcarotid stenting (TCAR).4 He also
`
`performs arteriovenous (AV) fistula procedures—a necessary procedure for many dialysis
`
`patients—in significantly less time than the other three vascular surgeons in Bloomington and
`
`with excellent results. Patients in need of these procedures are high risk, with preexisting heart
`
`and lung conditions that make anesthesia problematic. Dr. Vasquez’s ability to perform
`
`procedures quickly greatly increases the likelihood of success and decreases the risk of patient
`
`morbidity.
`
`10.
`
`Examples abound of IU Health’s employed vascular surgeons failing to recognize
`
`and/or sending patients home with life-threatening, severe aneurysms and other life-threatening
`
`vascular conditions. Some of these patients have died. The IU Health vascular surgeons have
`
`been directed not to perform certain procedures altogether, and instead have been instructed to
`
`send patients needing more complicated procedures, including TCAR, to another IU Health
`
`facility outside of Southern Indiana. IU Health even sends most patients with aneurysms—a
`
`common, but life-threatening condition—to IU Health’s Methodist Hospital an hour away in
`
`Indianapolis. IU Health is forcing patients to travel further to seek care they could—but for IU
`
`Health’s conduct against Dr. Vasquez—receive closer to home, cheaper, and with good
`
`outcomes. This policy and practice increases prices and reduces quality of care in the following
`
`ways: (1) Methodist’s prices are higher; (2) the increased patient load overburdens the physician
`
`and nursing staff at Methodist, reducing quality of care; and (3) transferring patients
`
`
`4 TCAR is revolutionary because it replaces the traditional carotid endarterectomy, which is a procedure to remove
`plaque buildup in the carotid artery to reduce the risk of strokes. A common side effect of the carotid
`endarterectomy is that calcium deposits get back into the patient’s blood stream, putting the patient at risk for stroke
`again. With TCAR, the patient’s blood is shunted away and filtered—resulting in no calcium deposits and no side
`effects.
`
`5
`
`
`
`Case 1:21-cv-01693-JMS-MG Document 1 Filed 06/11/21 Page 6 of 40 PageID #: 6
`
`
`
`unnecessarily increases the patient’s time before obtaining (often life-saving) surgery, increasing
`
`morbidity.
`
`11.
`
`IU Health specifically refers and/or transfers patients formerly operated on by
`
`Dr. Vasquez to Indianapolis for treatment, instead of referring those patients to local vascular
`
`surgeons. IU Health is further compromising patient health by targeting these patients for
`
`retaliatory gains against Dr. Vasquez.
`
`12.
`
`IU Health has specifically instructed employees and other physicians with
`
`privileges at IU Health not to refer patients to Dr. Vasquez—retaliating against those who
`
`continue to refer patients to him or who defend him against baseless attacks. Primary care
`
`physicians prefer to refer to Dr. Vasquez, and a few have continued to refer to him despite IU
`
`Health’s directive not to do so because they value patient quality of care over IU Health’s profits.
`
`IU Health’s actions have no procompetitive justification, and are done solely to exclude Dr.
`
`Vasquez for economic reasons.
`
`13.
`
`The Bloomington area has suffered beyond the monopoly in vascular surgery. The
`
`area has lost several skilled physicians in other specialties who wanted to stay in Bloomington as
`
`independents but who have left because noncompete provisions with IU Health, and IU Health’s
`
`internal referral policies prohibited them from continuing to practice in Bloomington. IU
`
`Health’s vice hold over primary care services must be dismantled before Bloomington loses
`
`more specialists and quality of care declines even further.
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`14.
`
`Plaintiff Dr. Vasquez is a Board Certified Vascular Surgeon who has practiced in
`
`Bloomington since 2006. He resides in Bloomington, Indiana.
`
`6
`
`
`
`Case 1:21-cv-01693-JMS-MG Document 1 Filed 06/11/21 Page 7 of 40 PageID #: 7
`
`
`
`15.
`
`Defendant Indiana University Health, Inc. (“IU Health, Inc.”) is a health system
`
`with a principal place of business in Indianapolis, Indiana. It is a 14 hospital system with several
`
`locations in the state. IU Health owns and operates three hospital facilities in Southern Indiana:
`
`Bloomington Hospital, and two critical access hospital hospitals, each with 25 beds—IU Health
`
`Bedford and IU Health Paoli.
`
`16.
`
`Defendant Indiana University Health Bloomington, Inc. is an Indiana not-for-
`
`profit domestic corporation doing business in Indiana under the registered assumed name, IU
`
`Health Bloomington Hospital. In 2018, Bloomington Hospital had 282 staffed beds, 12,552
`
`inpatient admissions, and over 225,000 outpatient visits.
`
`17.
`
`Defendant Dr. Daniel Handel is Chief Medical Officer of Bloomington Hospital,
`
`and, on information and belief, is a resident of Monroe County, Indiana.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`18.
`
`Dr. Vasquez alleges federal antitrust claims against the Defendants pursuant to
`
`Section 2 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 2 and Section 7 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 18.
`
`19.
`
`Dr. Vasquez seeks damages pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 15 (“any person who shall be
`
`injured in his business or property by reason of anything forbidden in the antitrust laws may sue
`
`therefor in any district court of the United States in the district in which the defendant resides or
`
`is found or has an agent, without respect to the amount in controversy, and shall recover
`
`threefold the damages by him sustained, and the cost of suit, including a reasonable attorney’s
`
`fee”).
`
`20.
`
`Dr. Vasquez seeks injunctive relief pursuant to 15 U.S.C.§ 26 (“[a]ny person,
`
`firm, corporation, or association shall be entitled to sue for and have injunctive relief, in any
`
`7
`
`
`
`Case 1:21-cv-01693-JMS-MG Document 1 Filed 06/11/21 Page 8 of 40 PageID #: 8
`
`
`
`court of the United States having jurisdiction over the parties, against threatened loss or damage
`
`by a violation of the antitrust laws . . . .”).
`
`21.
`
`This Court has original jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s federal antitrust claims
`
`pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §§ 4, 15 and 26, and 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1337.
`
`22.
`
`Venue is proper in this Court under 28 U.S.C. §1391 because: (i) Defendants
`
`reside in this District and conduct a substantial amount of business in this District; and (ii) a
`
`substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, and continue to
`
`occur, in this District.
`
`23.
`
`Dr. Vasquez alleges state antitrust claims pursuant to Ind. Code § 24-1-2-2 and
`
`Ind. Code § 24-1-2-7 and common law claims under Indiana law against Defendants. This Court
`
`has supplemental jurisdiction over the Plaintiff’s state law claims under 28 U.S.C. § 1367
`
`because they are directly related to the Plaintiff’s federal antitrust claims and form part of the
`
`same case or controversy.
`
`DR. VASQUEZ BUILT A SUCCESSFUL, INDEPENDENT VASCULAR SURGERY
`PRACTICE IN BLOOMINGTON
`
`24.
`
`Dr. Vasquez graduated with a Doctor of Medicine from the University of Iowa in
`
`1996. In 2001, Dr. Vasquez completed his General Surgery residency at Mount Sinai School of
`
`Medicine-Cabrini Medical Center in New York, New York. He was Chief Resident in General
`
`Surgery at that time.
`
`25.
`
`From 2001 to 2003, Dr. Vasquez completed a Vascular Surgery Fellowship at the
`
`Boston University Medical Center in Boston, Massachusetts. From 2003 to 2006, Dr. Vasquez
`
`was a Vascular Surgery Clinical Instructor at the University of Illinois College of Medicine in
`
`Champaign-Urbana, Illinois and practiced vascular surgery at the Carle Clinic in Urbana,
`
`Illinois.
`
`8
`
`
`
`Case 1:21-cv-01693-JMS-MG Document 1 Filed 06/11/21 Page 9 of 40 PageID #: 9
`
`
`
`26.
`
`In 2006, Dr. Vasquez moved to Bloomington and joined Dr. Virginia Newman’s
`
`practice, Vascular Surgery and Technology PC. Another vascular surgeon, Dr. John Hamelink,
`
`joined Dr. Newman’s practice around the same time in approximately 2006.
`
`27.
`
`Beginning in 2006, Drs. Newman, Hamelink, and Vasquez were the only
`
`practicing vascular surgeons in Southern Indiana. All three vascular surgeons held privileges at
`
`Bloomington Hospital.
`
`28.
`
`After practicing with Vascular Surgery and Technology for approximately one
`
`year, Dr. Vasquez decided to open his own practice, the Vascular Center and Vein Clinic of
`
`Southern Indiana. Dr. Newman relocated to Northern Indiana and sold her interest in Vascular
`
`Surgery and Technology to Dr. Hamelink. Dr. Hamelink renamed his practice Vascular Premier
`
`Care, and continued to operate it until 2012 when he closed the practice and became an
`
`employee of Internal Medical Associates, which later became known as Premier Healthcare. IU
`
`Health acquired Premier Healthcare in 2017 and its physicians, including Dr. Hamelink, became
`
`IU Health employees.
`
`29.
`
`From 2006 until his privileges were revoked under retaliatory pretext in 2019, Dr.
`
`Vasquez was a respected member of the Bloomington Hospital staff. He was on the
`
`Credentialing Committee between 2007 and 2010. And from approximately 2010 to 2012, Dr.
`
`Vasquez served as Chairman of the vascular subsection of the cardiovascular service line.
`
`30.
`
`Dr. Vasquez preferred to remain independent. Since 2006, he maintained
`
`privileges at two other facilities in addition to Bloomington Hospital: Monroe Hospital—a
`
`32-bed facility located 10 minutes from Bloomington Hospital and the closest competitor
`
`hospital to Bloomington Hospital—and the Indiana Specialty Surgery Center. Dr. Vasquez was
`
`Chief of Staff at Monroe Hospital from approximately 2010 to 2015, and a member of the
`
`9
`
`
`
`Case 1:21-cv-01693-JMS-MG Document 1 Filed 06/11/21 Page 10 of 40 PageID #: 10
`
`
`
`Medical Executive Committee and the Credentialing Committee for several years. He remains in
`
`good standing at both Monroe Hospital and Indiana Specialty Surgery Center.
`
`31.
`
`Despite having privileges elsewhere, Dr. Vasquez performed the vast majority
`
`(over 95%) of his inpatient procedures at Bloomington Hospital and hundreds of outpatient
`
`procedures there per year until 2018.
`
`32.
`
`Between 2007 and 2019, Dr. Vasquez and Dr. Hamelink were the only two
`
`vascular surgeons practicing in Bloomington. During that time, both physicians held privileges at
`
`Bloomington Hospital, and they shared call at the hospital. Despite sharing call equally (50/50),
`
`Dr. Vasquez cared for over 70% of the total patients during that time. This is because many
`
`physicians prefer to work with Dr. Vasquez due to his skill, competence, and ability to perform
`
`procedures quickly and accurately. Meanwhile, Dr. Hamelink did not perform the variety of
`
`procedures that Dr. Vasquez did and prefers not to perform more complex procedures.
`
`Dr. Vasquez never turned a physician down who called him unless he was out of town.
`
`33.
`
`This continued as it had for approximately one year after Dr. Hamelink became an
`
`IU Health employee in 2017. Thereafter, IU Health became increasingly antagonistic toward Dr.
`
`Vasquez because he chose to remain independent, and began a smear campaign to create the
`
`pretext to enable IU Health to revoke Dr. Vasquez’s privileges.
`
`HOW VASCULAR SURGEONS RECEIVE PATIENT
`REFERRALS AND PAYMENT
`
`34.
`
`Patients needing vascular surgery services are routed to a vascular surgeon
`
`through one of two ways: (1) the patient is referred by their primary care physician (an internist
`
`or family medicine physician); or (2) the patient is hospitalized and the treating physician or
`
`surgeon (often a general surgeon or hospitalist) calls a vascular surgeon with privileges at that
`
`hospital.
`
`10
`
`
`
`Case 1:21-cv-01693-JMS-MG Document 1 Filed 06/11/21 Page 11 of 40 PageID #: 11
`
`
`
`35.
`
`Patients and insurance companies receive two charges for vascular surgery
`
`services—a “facility fee,” which is the charge for the use of the operating room or facility, and
`
`the “physician fee,” which covers the vascular surgeon’s services. In general, the facility fee is
`
`higher in a hospital setting than in an outpatient or office setting. This is true even when patients
`
`receive the exact same services. And, the facility fee is higher in hospitals that have the
`
`capability to provide higher acuity care than when patients receive the exact same services in
`
`lower acuity hospitals, outpatient facilities, or physician offices.
`
`SUBSTANTIAL EFFECT ON INTERSTATE COMMERCE
`
`36.
`
`The interstate commerce requirement is met because Defendants IU Health, Inc.
`
`and Bloomington Hospital admit patients from out of state, purchase equipment from out of
`
`state, receive reimbursement from insurance companies located out of state, and receive
`
`Medicare and Medicaid funding from out of state.
`
`THE GEOGRAPHIC AND PRODUCT MARKETS
`
`37.
`
`Bloomington is a proper geographic market. Patients prefer to stay within
`
`Bloomington to receive care, and do not want to travel to Indianapolis or other cities located an
`
`hour or further from Bloomington. Physicians who practice in Bloomington also prefer to stay
`
`local rather than travel long distances for work or, alternatively, uproot themselves and their
`
`families to move their practice. Once a physician has an established practice, it is extremely
`
`difficult to leave one city and build a practice in another location because healthcare is local.
`
`Physicians lose most if not all of their current patients in doing so and must find another source
`
`of referrals. In addition, to be viable, commercial insurance plans need healthcare providers
`
`within Bloomington to make available for their insureds. Health insurance plans covering
`
`Bloomington would not offer a plan that does not include a provider in Bloomington. Thus, the
`
`proper geographic market for healthcare services is local—and, in this case, Bloomington.
`
`11
`
`
`
`Case 1:21-cv-01693-JMS-MG Document 1 Filed 06/11/21 Page 12 of 40 PageID #: 12
`
`
`
`38.
`
`In addition, or in the alternative, Southern Indiana is a proper geographic market.
`
`Southern Indiana includes the area extending from Martinsville, Indiana in the north to Paoli,
`
`Indiana in the south along IN-37, encompassing Morgan, Owen, Monroe, Brown, Greene,
`
`Daviess, Martin, Lawrence, Orange, and Washington counties. These counties comprise the
`
`primary and secondary service areas for Bloomington Hospital and its direct competitors.
`
`Southern Indiana is a proper geographic market because healthcare providers compete for
`
`patients located in the area, healthcare providers prefer to practice locally in the area rather than
`
`move their practice, and payors require providers in Southern Indiana.
`
`39.
`
`Primary care physician services is a relevant product market. Primary care
`
`physicians (which include family practice and internal medicine physicians) provide front-line
`
`healthcare to patients. These practitioners provide a broad range of preventive care, manage
`
`chronic diseases, and provide referrals and coordination of care with specialists like vascular
`
`surgeons. Many health plans require patients to have a designated primary care practitioner, and
`
`cover specialist services only if referred by the patient’s designated primary care practitioner.
`
`Health plans do not allow patients to assign physicians in other specialties as their primary care
`
`practitioner.
`
`40.
`
`Vascular surgery services is a relevant product market. Vascular surgery is a
`
`surgical specialty in which diseases of the vascular system—arteries, veins, and lymphatic
`
`circulation—are managed by medical therapy, minimally-invasive catheter procedures (stents),
`
`and surgical reconstruction. Vascular surgery is a primary surgery specialty recognized by the
`
`American Board of Surgery, and physicians may become Board Certified in Vascular Surgery.
`
`Dr. Vasquez is a Board Certified Vascular Surgeon. Only trained vascular surgeons can perform
`
`vascular surgery services. A patient needing vascular surgery services cannot substitute other
`
`12
`
`
`
`Case 1:21-cv-01693-JMS-MG Document 1 Filed 06/11/21 Page 13 of 40 PageID #: 13
`
`
`
`hospital services for vascular surgery services, nor are other specialists like cardiologists or
`
`nephrologists substitutes for vascular surgeons.
`
`IU HEALTH BUILT ITS MONOPOLY IN PRIMARY CARE SERVICES THROUGH
`ANTICOMPETITIVE ACQUISITIONS
`
`41.
`
`In January 1997, three Indianapolis hospitals—Methodist Hospital, Riley Hospital
`
`for Children, and Indiana University Hospital—merged to form Clarian Health Partners. Since
`
`that time, Clarian quickly acquired other facilities in the state, including other hospitals and
`
`physician practices. Formerly independent Bloomington Hospital merged with Clarian Health
`
`Partners in 2010. In January 2011, Clarian Health Partners rebranded as Indiana University
`
`Health, Inc. and Bloomington Hospital became IU Health Bloomington Hospital.
`
`42.
`
`Today, IU Health, Inc. operates 14 hospitals in the state of Indiana, including
`
`three in Southern Indiana—Bloomington Hospital, IU Health Bedford Hospital, and IU Health
`
`Paoli Hospital. In Southern Indiana, it also controls IU Health Orthopedics & Sports Medicine
`
`Center (an outpatient orthopedic facility), a radiology group, a neurology group, a behavioral
`
`health facility, and owns 45% of Southern Indiana Surgery Center, an outpatient surgical facility.
`
`43.
`
`Controlling nearly all of the facilities in the Bloomington area was not enough. IU
`
`Health sought to control physicians as well. In particular, it sought to obtain a monopoly over
`
`primary care services because that monopoly allows it to dictate where and how patients receive
`
`specialty services. That control has enabled IU Health to secure and maintain its monopoly over
`
`a variety of specialty care services, including vascular surgery services, vascular ultrasound lab
`
`services, and cardiovascular laboratory studies.
`
`44.
`
`The turning point for Bloomington occurred in May 2017 when IU Health, Inc.
`
`acquired Premier Healthcare, which was one of the largest independent physician groups in the
`
`state at that time with 40 primary care and specialty physicians. Premier Healthcare’s physicians
`
`13
`
`
`
`Case 1:21-cv-01693-JMS-MG Document 1 Filed 06/11/21 Page 14 of 40 PageID #: 14
`
`
`
`became IU Health employees and part of the larger IU Health Southern Indiana Physicians
`
`(“Southern Indiana Physicians”) practice group. Southern Indiana Physicians now includes
`
`hundreds of primary care practitioners, specialists, and nurse pracitioners operating in 37
`
`locations across Southern Indiana. Southern Indiana Physicians refer patients to specialists with
`
`IU Health privileges.
`
`45. With the Premier Healthcare acquisition, IU Health secured control over Primary
`
`Care Physicians in Bloomington. Today, 82 Primary Care Physicians and nurse practitioners are
`
`a part of Southern Indiana Physicians. IU Health controls 97% of the Primary Care Physicians
`
`within Bloomington, and over 80% of the Primary Care Physicians in the larger Southern
`
`Indiana area.
`
`46.
`
`IU Health’s merger with Premier Healthcare gave it the ability to foreclose
`
`competitors because it now controls where patients receive specialty services, like vascular
`
`surgery services. Most patients comply with primary physician recommendations as to who will
`
`perform their surgeries and where they should be performed, and IU Health Primary Care
`
`Physicians refer to IU Health specialists.
`
`47.
`
`IU Health prefers to employ physicians, not because patients or health insurance
`
`companies benefit, but because IU Health makes more money and has greater control over
`
`referrals. When its employees perform procedures, IU Health retains both the facility fee and the
`
`physician fee, reaping a greater profit.
`
`48.
`
`By nature of referrals from Primary Care Physicians to specialists, primary care
`
`services and vascular surgery services are complementary services. IU Health’s acquisition of
`
`Premier Healthcare, and subsequent monopoly over primary care services, gave it power to
`
`diminish competition by excluding rivals. In particular, it can cause rivals to lose significant
`
`14
`
`
`
`Case 1:21-cv-01693-JMS-MG Document 1 Filed 06/11/21 Page 15 of 40 PageID #: 15
`
`
`
`referral sources, which are integral to a specialist’s ability to stay in business. IU Health’s ability
`
`to control the referral sources to Dr. Vasquez means it has the power to reduce his new patient
`
`base significantly, threatening the viability of his independent practice.
`
`49.
`
`IU Health’s control over primary care services increases the barriers to entry for
`
`independent physicians. Because IU Health requires that its physicians refer only to other IU
`
`Health affiliated specialists, specialists must affiliate with IU Health to obtain and keep their
`
`referrals. And non-employed specialists with privileges at IU Health are pressured not to
`
`compete aggressively with IU Health or risk losing their privileges out of retaliation. In the past
`
`three years, numerous specialists have left Bloomington because they did not want to become an
`
`IU Health employee but could not practice in Bloomington without IU Health referrals. This
`
`includes highly skilled specialists in numerous areas, including neurology, general surgery,
`
`pulmonology, critical care, neurosurgery, and nephrology.
`
`IU HEALTH HAS MONOPOLIES OVER PRIMARY CARE SERVICES AND
`VASCULAR SURGERY SERVICES IN BLOOMINGTON AND SOUTHERN INDIANA
`
`50.
`
`IU Health is a monopolist in both primary care services and vascular surgery
`
`services in Bloomington and Southern Indiana. Its ability to maintain high shares while charging
`
`supracompetitive prices demonstrates it is a monopolist.
`
`51.
`
`IU Health has high shares in both primary care services and vascular surgery
`
`services in Bloomington and the rest of Southern Indiana. Its shares of these services are high
`
`enough to raise a presumption of monopoly power. IU Health employs and controls all but one
`
`of the Primary Care Physicians in Bloomington. In other words, it has a near complete monopoly
`
`over all referral sources. In addition, IU Health has high shares in inpatient vascular surgery
`
`services (86%), and outpatient vascular surgery services performed in a hospital setting (95%).
`
`15
`
`
`
`Case 1:21-cv-01693-JMS-MG Document 1 Filed 06/11/21 Page 16 of 40 PageID #: 16
`
`
`
`52.
`
`Bloomington Hospital is a “must have” provider. Bloomington Hospital is the
`
`only Level III Trauma center, the only Level I Heart Attack center, and the only Stroke Center in
`
`Bloomington and the entire Southern Indiana area. Patients are transferred to Bloomington
`
`Hospital from around Southern Indiana because it is the only facility with certain specialties. For
`
`example, no other facility in Southern Indiana has interventional cardiologists. Therefore, if a
`
`patient arrives at any facility in Southern Indiana complaining of chest pain—whether an IU
`
`Health facility or not—the patient must be sent to Bloomington Hospital for further care if the
`
`emergency department physicians determine the patient should see an interventional cardiologist.
`
`53.
`
`IU Health’s ability to charge supracompetitive prices is evidence of its monopoly
`
`power in Bloomington and Southern Indiana. As a result of IU Health’s dominance, prices are
`
`higher because it controls where patients receive services. IU Health’s facilities are more
`
`expensive, and, therefore, the cost of healthcare to both health insurance companies and patients
`
`has increased.
`
`54.
`
`High barriers to entry and IU Health’s control over referral sources limit the
`
`ability of any independent physician or physician practice to enter Bloomington and Southern
`
`Indiana. Because of the difficulty in competing against a monopolist, no hospital has entered the
`
`geographic area since Monroe Hospital opened in 2006. And Monroe Hospital nearly did not
`
`survive—it was on the verge of bankruptcy only a few years after opening. Before then, the last
`
`hospital to open has operated for decades. Nor have there been recent entrants in outpatient
`
`surgery centers.
`
`55.
`
`IU Health’s monopoly over referral sources prohibi