DataBreaches.Net

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

Potential class action lawsuit filed over missing Kaiser flash drive

Posted on December 28, 2013 by Dissent

Where there’s a breach, there’s often a lawsuit. Barbara Wallace of Courthouse News reports:

A flash drive holding the confidential medical records of almost 49,000 Kaiser patients was stolen, exposing their names and other information, a class claims in a lawsuit filed in Los Angeles County Central District Court.

Ginger Buck brought a class action against Kaiser Permanente International under California’s Confidentiality of Medical Information Act. Under the act, medical facilities must keep patient information confidential unless the patient gives written authorization.

Read more on Courthouse News. This part of CN’s coverage caught my eye:

  The complaint states, “On or around Dec. 2013, the private medical information of all patients – including plaintiff and the class – who had treated at Kaiser Permanente had been stolen,” specifically, a computer flash drive containing the medical information of almost 49,000 patients was gone.

According to my notes and previous blog entries, however, Kaiser learned of the breach on September 25, which means it happened on or before that date. So I looked at the complaint (pdf) to see if it alleged that the breach occurred in December, in case I somehow confused two different incidents. The complaint is written so poorly/ungrammatically that I can understand confusion as to when the breach occurred:

Kaiser_Buck

Wow. If what they meant to say was that patients learned, in December, from a public web site  that a flash drive had been stolen, you’d never know it from the above. The complaint even makes it sound like the flash drive was disclosed on the unspecified public web site.  Nowhere does it seem to mention that Kaiser learned of the breach on September 25 and it was disclosed publicly on November 25 on the California Attorney General’s security breach web site.

Then, too, the complaint alleges the flash drive was stolen, but nowhere in Kaiser’s notification does it say that the flash drive was stolen. Kaiser’s statement was that it was reported missing, which means it could have been misplaced or lost and not stolen.

Can Kaiser move to dismiss on the basis of grammar? I doubt it, but I pity anyone trying to make sense of the “factual background” at this point. I’m not even sure that the defendant being listed, “Kaiser Permanente International” is the appropriate defendant for a claim involving Kaiser’s Anaheim Center.

More importantly, the suit seeks statutory damages under the California Medical Information Act (CMIA).  As noted previously on this blog, an October ruling by the California Court of Appeals has taken a sledge hammer to that approach.  See Paul Paray’s discussion of the impact of  Regents of the Univ. of Cal. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County, No. B249148 (Cal. Ct. App. October 15, 2013) on such lawsuits over on InformationLawGroup. Plaintiffs in the current lawsuit are likely to have an uphill battle ahead.

 

Category: Health Data

Post navigation

← WA: Sumner fires temporary court clerk for sending herself city data on 3,600 people
The Briar Group discloses security breach affecting eight Boston bars and restaurants (updated) →

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

  • WestJet investigates cyberattack disrupting internal systems
  • Plastic surgeons often store nude photos of patients with their identity information. When would we call that “negligent?”
  • India: Servers of two city hospitals hacked; police register FIR
  • Ph: Coop Hospital confirms probe into reported cyberattack
  • Slapped wrists for Financial Conduct Authority staff who emailed work data home
  • School Districts Unaware BoardDocs Software Published Their Private Files
  • A guilty plea in the PowerSchool case still leaves unanswered questions
  • Brussels Parliament hit by cyber-attack
  • Sweden under cyberattack: Prime minister sounds the alarm
  • Former CIA Analyst Sentenced to Over Three Years in Prison for Unlawfully Transmitting Top Secret National Defense Information

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

  • Anne Wojcicki Wins Bidding for 23andMe
  • Would you — or wouldn’t you?
  • New York passes a bill to prevent AI-fueled disasters
  • Synthetic Data and the Illusion of Privacy: Legal Risks of Using De-Identified AI Training Sets
  • States sue to block the sale of genetic data collected by DNA testing company 23andMe
  • AI tools collect and store data about you from all your devices – here’s how to be aware of what you’re revealing
  • 23andMe Privacy Ombudsman Urges User Consent Pre-Data Sale

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.