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.

No related posts.

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

  • Hunters International to provide free decryptors for all victims as they shut down (1)
  • SEC and SolarWinds Seek Settlement in Securities Fraud Case
  • Cyberattacks Disrupt Iran’s Bread Distribution, Payments Remain Frozen
  • Hacker with ‘political agenda’ stole data from Columbia, university says
  • Keymous+ Hacker Group Claims Responsibility for Over 700 Global DDoS Attacks
  • Data breach reveals Catwatchful ‘stalkerware’ is spying on thousands of phones
  • DOJ investigates ex-ransomware negotiator over extortion kickbacks
  • Hackers Using PDFs to Impersonate Microsoft, DocuSign, and More in Callback Phishing Campaigns
  • One in Five Law Firms Hit by Cyberattacks Over Past 12 Months
  • U.S. Sanctions Russian Bulletproof Hosting Provider for Supporting Cybercriminals Behind Ransomware

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

  • Record-Breaking $1.55M CCPA Settlement Against Health Information Website Publisher
  • Ninth Circuit Reviews Website Tracking Class Actions and the Reach of California’s Privacy Law
  • US healthcare offshoring: Navigating patient data privacy laws and regulations
  • Data breach reveals Catwatchful ‘stalkerware’ is spying on thousands of phones
  • Google Trackers: What You Can Actually Escape And What You Can’t
  • Oregon Amends Its Comprehensive Privacy Statute
  • Wisconsin Supreme Court’s Liberal Majority Strikes Down 176-Year-Old Abortion Ban

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.