DataBreaches.Net

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

Having your ePHI dumped on the dark web by threat actors doesn’t necessarily give you standing to sue

Posted on May 26, 2021 by Dissent

In May, 2020, Assured Imaging in Arizona experienced a ransomware attack that they revealed in August, 2020.The incident reportedly impacted 244,813 patients. The data dump by the Pysa threat actors contained a lot of ePHI that appeared to be mostly mammography pre-screening histories or forms with data types such as medical record number, names, addresses, date of birth, referring physician, health insurance carrier information,
and reason for scan with relevant personal and family history.

Earlier this month, Assured got some good news when a federal judge in Tucson dismissed a potential class action lawsuit against them, finding that the plaintiffs did not have standing to sue as they had not alleged an injury in fact. As Reuters reported:

Hinderaker agreed with Assured that the type of information potentially accessed – names, addresses, medical history and other patient data – don’t rise to the level needed to find a “certainly impending injury.”

Read more on Reuters.

Category: Commentaries and AnalysesHealth DataU.S.

Post navigation

← Law Firm Responds To Data Breach Claim By… Leaking Data. Checkmate!
After Colonial Pipeline Hack, U.S. to Require Operators to Report Cyberattacks →

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

  • Ireland’s Data Protection Commission publishes 2024 Annual Report
  • The headlines suggested Freedman Healthcare suffered a ransomware attack that affected patient data. The reality was quite different.
  • Runsafe report: Medical device cyberattacks threaten patient care, strain budgets, top concern for healthcare sector
  • Ryuk ransomware’s initial access expert extradited to the U.S. from Ukraine
  • Alleged Geisinger hacker will defend himself pro se.
  • Tallahassee Memorial Healthcare reveals it was also impacted by Cerner/Legacy Oracle cyberattack
  • Hospital cyberattack investigation complete, no formal review needed (1)
  • Largest Ever Seizure of Funds Related to Crypto Confidence Scams
  • IMPACT: 170 patients harmed as a result of Qilin’s ransomware attack on NHS vendor Synnovis
  • DOJ’s Data Security Program: Key Compliance Considerations for Impacted Entities

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

  • US Judge Invalidates Biden Rule Protecting Privacy for Abortions
  • DOJ’s Data Security Program: Key Compliance Considerations for Impacted Entities
  • 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

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.