OpenEvidence and Doximity Settle Clinical AI Legal Dispute

Oct 20, 2026
OpenEvidence and Doximity have settled a legal dispute involving allegations of corporate espionage, doctor impersonation, defamation, and platform misuse. A federal judge dismissed the case with prejudice.

OpenEvidence and Doximity have settled their legal dispute, Healthcare Dive reports. A federal judge in Massachusetts dismissed the case with prejudice on Friday, preventing it from being filed again in that court.

Each company agreed to pay its own legal fees. Other settlement terms were not disclosed.

OpenEvidence sued Doximity in 2025, alleging that Doximity employees posed as physicians and questioned its clinical AI service to uncover proprietary information. Doximity countersued, accusing OpenEvidence of defamation and harassment.

OpenEvidence later dropped its trade secrets claims and revised its complaint to focus on alleged violations of federal anti hacking law and misuse of its platform.

We hope you enjoyed this article

Free newsletter

AI Policy Brief

Weekly report on AI regulations, safety standards, government policies, and compliance requirements worldwide.

AI Token Webinar

Whitepaper

Tensordyne Napier: What If One Rack Could Do the Work of Nine?

Tensordyne

This Tensordyne whitepaper presents Napier, an inference-focused AI processor and rack-scale system based on the company’s TDN Math logarithmic number system. It examines infrastructure requirements for large mixture-of-experts and agentic models, compares major inference architecture approaches, and details the TDN AIP processor, TDN72 pod, TDN Link fabric, and Napier Ultra configuration. The paper reports simulation-based performance, cost, and accuracy-validation results, including Tensordyne’s projected comparison of one Napier rack with a nine-rack Nvidia Rubin plus Groq deployment; the chip is reported as taped out and in fabrication.

Read more

You may also like

Free, six days a week

Daily AI Brief: the AI news that matters, in your inbox.