Craig A. Newman of Patterson Belknap writes:
Did LabMD, the now-defunct cancer testing company, expose sensitive patient information with shoddy data security practices as U.S. regulations have charged, or was the company victimized by a private forensics firm extorting it for business – raising the troubling question of whether the entire case against LabMD was built on a false premise.
That is a central question in Daugherty et al. v. Sheer et al., a case pending before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. LabMD has asked the court to reconsider its decision that two Federal Trade Commission lawyers are immune from a lawsuit filed against them by LabMD, charging that its First Amendment rights were violated when the FTC lawyers engaged in a “deliberate and successful effort to cause the Commission to authorize an enforcement action” based on misrepresenting critical facts in the case. LabMD has charged that FTC lawyers Alain Sheer and Ruth Yodaiken recommended that the commission start an enforcement action that “was laced with lies.”
Read more on Data Security Law Blog.
Related:
- Landmark civil penalty of AU$5.8 million issued under Australia’s Privacy Act
- How many courts have had sealed and sensitive files exposed by one vendor's error?
- Ukrainian Conti Ransomware Suspect Extradited to US from Ireland
- Legal Aid Agency chief admits difficulties understanding impact of cyberattack
- Snowflake Loses Two More Bids to Dismiss Data Breach Plaintiffs
- US company with access to biggest telecom firms uncovers breach by nation-state hackers
Didn’t the secretary share the company files on Limewire? If that is true, I would think they were not hacked.