DataBreaches.Net

Menu
  • About
  • Breach Notification Laws
  • Privacy Policy
  • Transparency Report
Menu

FTC vs. LabMD update

Posted on December 6, 2013 by Dissent

Two more court filings in FTC vs. LabMD are now available online: the FTC’s Opposition to LabMD’s Motion to Stay Proceedings and LabMD’s reply to FTC’s response opposing LabMD’s motion to dismiss the complaint with prejudice and to stay the proceedings. The latter is of more interest to me right now, but I am putting off a more careful reading until I’ve got more time and coffee.  At first blush, though, I think LabMD’s counsel has mis-stated what FTC actually said when they argue:

FTC admits LabMD is and always has been a HIPAA-covered entity regulated exclusively by HHS under HIPAA/HITECH.1 It also admits LabMD is specifically exempted from FTC’s HITECH rule. Cf. Mot. 12 & n.9. It offers no explanation why HITECH, Pub. L. 111-5 §13424(b)(1), directs HHS and FTC to determine which agency is best equipped to enforce HITECH against non-HIPAA-covered entities (FTC agrees that HHS exclusively regulates HIPAA-covered entities like LabMD). It also ignores HIPAA’s directive to HHS—not FTC—to “adopt [data-]security standards” for “health information.” 42 U.S.C. §1320d-2(d)(1); 42 U.S.C. §1320d(4)(defining “health information”).

I’ll need to go back and check, but I’m pretty sure FTC never said that LabMD is regulated exclusively by HHS. Their whole argument is that both agencies have complementary authority when it comes to covered entities. But I’ll read it all again later and may have more to say later.

Category: Health Data

Post navigation

← Feds not required to report security breaches of Obamacare exchange website
Adobe notifies me that all’s good following their hack →

Now more than ever

"Stand with Ukraine:" above raised hands. The illustration is in blue and yellow, the colors of Ukraine's flag.

Search

Browse by Categories

Recent Posts

  • Episource notifying 5.4 million patients of cyberattack in January
  • Investigation of 2024 Helsinki data breach – Report
  • Major trial underway for data leak that left 72,000 victims in France
  • Anubis: A Closer Look at an Emerging Ransomware with Built-in Wiper
  • HealthEC Agrees to $5.48 Million Settlement to End Data Breach Lawsuit
  • US offering $10 million for info on Iranian hackers behind IOControl malware
  • Sompo Japan Insurance submits improvement plan after info leakage
  • Moreno Valley, Calif., Schools Report Data Breach
  • The Growing Cyber Risks from AI — and How Organizations Can Fight Back
  • UPDATING: Credit Control Corporation denies any current breach

No, You Can’t Buy a Post or an Interview

This site does not accept sponsored posts or link-back arrangements. Inquiries about either are ignored.

And despite what some trolls may try to claim: DataBreaches has never accepted even one dime to interview or report on anyone. Nor will DataBreaches ever pay anyone for data or to interview them.

Want to Get Our RSS Feed?

Grab it here:

https://databreaches.net/feed/

RSS Recent Posts on PogoWasRight.org

  • 23andMe fined £2.31 million for failing to protect UK users’ genetic data
  • DOJ Seeks More Time on Tower Dumps
  • Your household smart products must respect your privacy – including your air fryer
  • Vermont signs Kids Code into law, faces legal challenges
  • Data Categories and Surveillance Pricing: Ferguson’s Nuanced Approach to Privacy Innovation
  • Anne Wojcicki Wins Bidding for 23andMe
  • Would you — or wouldn’t you?

Have a News Tip?

Email: Tips[at]DataBreaches.net

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

Contact Me

Email: info[at]databreaches.net

Mastodon: Infosec.Exchange/@PogoWasRight

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

DMCA Concern: dmca[at]databreaches.net
© 2009 – 2025 DataBreaches.net and DataBreaches LLC. All rights reserved.