Latest news with #QNXT
Time of India
8 hours ago
- Business
- Time of India
Cognizant accuses Infosys of 'fishing expedition'
BENGALURU: In a new development in the ongoing Infosys-Cognizant trade secrets dispute, recent legal filings from Cognizant have revealed that Infosys 's counterclaims do not accuse CEO Ravi Kumar of any anticompetitive behaviour following his transition to Cognizant in 2023. In its submission to the court, the Nasdaq-listed firm said that Infosys's actions amounted to a 'fishing expedition', causing undue burden and inconvenience to both Kumar and Cognizant. Cognizant argued that Infosys has not presented evidence suggesting Kumar undermined the progress of its healthcare platform, Helix. Cognizant's legal team maintains that all claims advanced by Infosys pertain solely to Kumar's period at Infosys, not his tenure at Cognizant. The filing further asserts that Infosys's request for documents from Kumar's time at Cognizant-after raising concerns over trade secrets and invoking non-compete agreements-is without legal merit. Cognizant had acquired the healthcare software business TriZetto for $2.7 billion in 2014. TriZetto's flagship products, Facets and QNXT, process health insurance claims for millions across the US, relying on confidential trade secrets. Cognizant alleges that Infosys misused these secrets to create its own test case library for Facets, putting it in direct and allegedly unfair competition with TriZetto. Infosys, in turn, has made counterclaims, accusing Cognizant of hindering its development of a rival platform. Stay informed with the latest business news, updates on bank holidays and public holidays . AI Masterclass for Students. Upskill Young Ones Today!– Join Now
Time of India
12 hours ago
- Business
- Time of India
Cognizant accuses Infy of ‘fishing expedition'
Bengaluru: In a new development in the ongoing Infosys-Cognizant trade secrets dispute, recent legal filings from Cognizant have revealed that Infosys 's counterclaims do not accuse CEO Ravi Kumar of any anticompetitive behaviour following his transition to Cognizant in 2023. In its submission to the court, the Nasdaq-listed firm said that Infosys's actions amounted to a 'fishing expedition', causing undue burden and inconvenience to both Kumar and Cognizant. Cognizant argued that Infosys has not presented evidence suggesting Kumar undermined the progress of its healthcare platform, Helix. Cognizant's legal team maintains that all claims advanced by Infosys pertain solely to Kumar's period at Infosys, not his tenure at Cognizant. The filing further asserts that Infosys's request for documents from Kumar's time at Cognizant—after raising concerns over trade secrets and invoking non-compete agreements—is without legal merit. Cognizant had acquired the healthcare software business TriZetto for $2.7 billion in 2014. TriZetto's flagship products, Facets and QNXT, process health insurance claims for millions across the US, relying on confidential trade secrets. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Giao dịch CFD với công nghệ và tốc độ tốt hơn IC Markets Đăng ký Undo Cognizant alleges that Infosys misused these secrets to create its own test case library for Facets, putting it in direct and allegedly unfair competition with TriZetto. Infosys, in turn, has made counterclaims, accusing Cognizant of hindering its development of a rival platform. According to Infosys's lawsuit, Kumar, a former president at the company, was the principal executive sponsor of Helix and actively supported its rollout during his tenure. Infosys further claims that Cognizant's anti competitive tactics, aimed at impeding Helix's market launch, included the targeted hiring of senior executives central to the Helix project and incentivising them to delay or obstruct Helix's development and marketing shortly before their departures. In its recent filing, Cognizant stated it has identified numerous individuals with relevant knowledge of the matter and made them available as custodians for the legal process. "Infosys adopts a fundamentally flawed assumption that CEOs are subject to discovery routinely in antitrust cases; that is simply incorrect," the document showed. Cognizant argued that Infosys has not demonstrated any direct link between Kumar's Cognizant documents and its claims, nor attempted to seek information through alternative avenues. It also highlighted Infosys's refusal to fulfil requests for all email communications regarding Kumar's departure from Infosys. Cognizant concluded that Infosys has not produced any substantive proof that Kumar hindered the development of Helix for Cognizant's benefit, stating: "Infosys's demand for broad discovery into Mr. Kumar's documents (and a subsequent prolonged, distracting deposition) is not intended to unearth relevant evidence. Rather, it can only be viewed as a fishing expedition causing oppression, inconvenience, and burden to Mr. Kumar and Cognizant." An email sent to Infosys and Cognizant on the development didn't elicit a response till the time of going to the press.
Time of India
27-05-2025
- Business
- Time of India
Infy-Cognizant row: Court suggests informal resolution
Bengaluru: In the Infosys-Cognizant trade secrets misappropriation case, a US court has encouraged the two firms to resolve their discovery disagreements through informal means. The court has urged the two firms to arrange a telephone conference prior to filing pretrial discovery motions, engaging in meaningful discussions before involving the court. Should these discussions prove unsuccessful, parties are encouraged to have an informal telephone conference with the court, when suitable, to address disputes efficiently and economically. Cognizant acquired healthcare software firm TriZetto for $2.7 billion in 2014. Among its suite of software products are Facets and QNXT, which are sophisticated software products that have simplified the processing of health insurance claims for millions of Americans. Both Facets and QNXT are built on TriZetto's confidential and trade secret information. Cognizant alleged that Infosys misappropriated TriZetto's trade secrets to create a repository of test cases for Facets, which Infosys then marketed as its own and utilised to unfairly compete with TriZetto. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Esta nueva alarma con cámara es casi regalada en Florencio Varela (ver precio) Verisure Undo Infosys filed counterclaims to stop Cognizant's anti-competitive conduct. Infosys alleged that Cognizant implemented measures to hinder Infosys's efforts in creating a rival software solution. This, it said, included attracting key executive sponsors away from the project. These executives, Infosys said, were encouraged to stifle product advancement during their final months with the firm. Infosys's lawsuit alleged that the primary executive sponsor of Infosys Helix was current Cognizant CEO Ravi Kumar, who was its former President. Infosys alleged that Kumar championed Helix during his tenure at the firm. In a related US court ruling, Infosys submitted its responses opposing Cognizant's counterclaim. The company alleged that the anticompetitive conduct is ongoing under Kumar's custodianship. Infosys alleged that Cognizant engaged in a monopolistic scheme to harm competition across the American healthcare payor software and IT services markets. The court filing showed that documents in Kumar's possession are relevant to virtually all claims and defences presented in this case, and he might be the sole custodian of essential documents pertaining to certain matters. As a result, Infosys has requested that the court reject Cognizant's motion entirely and direct Cognizant to provide Kumar's relevant documents. When TOI reached out to Cognizant, the company said, "We appreciate the court's assistance in bringing an end to Infosys' unilateral efforts to obstruct discovery. The court made clear that Infosys cannot shield itself behind a self-imposed protective order to avoid disclosing information it is contractually and legally obligated to provide. We have been surprised by Infosys' refusal to produce this information—particularly given our clear entitlement to it under the parties' agreement and through standard discovery rules. The only reasonable explanation for Infosys' continued concealment is that the withheld documents will reveal the true scope and impact of Infosys' misconduct. We thank the court for its intervention and look forward to proving our case." An email sent to Infosys didn't elicit a response by the time of going to the press.
