LabMD

LabMD Appeals; Court Grants Temporary Stay

Margaret Young Levi Cyber Security and Cyber Crime, Data Privacy & Security, FTC Enforcement, HIPAA, Privacy & Security , , ,

lab_specimensIn a recent blog post entitled “FTC Issues Final Order and Data Security Lessons in LabMD Case,” we discussed the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”)’s Final Order in the LabMD case.  The FTC found that LabMD failed to provide reasonable and appropriate security for its customers’ personal information and that this failure caused (or was likely to cause) substantial consumer harm constituting an unfair act in violation of the law.  It  ordered LabMD to implement a number of compliance measures, including creating a comprehensive information security program, undergoing professional routine assessments of that program, providing notice to any possible affected individual and health insurance company, and setting up a toll-free hotline for any affected individual to call.  Although LabMD has closed its doors and has limited resources to comply with the FTC’s Final Order, it appealed the Final Order to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.  At the same time, it sought a stay from the FTC, which would halt these compliance measures pending the court’s review. The FTC denied the stay, so LabMD then asked the Eleventh Circuit to grant the stay.

On November 10, 2016, the Eleventh Circuit granted LabMD’s motion to stay enforcement of the Final Order pending appeal.  A copy of the court’s Order granting the stay is available here.  When issuing the stay, the court found that there existed a serious legal question as to Continue reading →

FTC issues Final Order and data security lessons in LabMD case

Margaret Young Levi Cyber Security and Cyber Crime, Data Privacy & Security, FTC Enforcement, HIPAA, Privacy & Security , , , , , , ,

After HoursOn July 29, 2016, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) made the latest move in its battle with LabMD, Inc. (LabMD) when it reversed an initial decision by an administrative law judge (ALJ).  The FTC determined that LabMD’s data security practices constitute an unfair act or practice within the meaning of Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act.  It issued an Opinion and Final Order requiring LabMD to “notify affected consumers, establish a comprehensive information security program reasonably designed to protect the security and confidentiality of the personal consumer information in its possession, and obtain independent assessments regarding its implementation of the program.”

This fight began in 2013 when the FTC first filed a Complaint contending that LabMD failed to reasonably protect data maintained on its computer network.  Two alleged security incidents form the basis of the Complaint.  In the first incident, Tiversa, trying to solicit LabMD’s business, discovered that a June 2007 insurance aging report containing personal information was available on a peer-to-peer (P2P) file-sharing network and informed LabMD.  In the second incident, dozens of day sheets and a small number of Continue reading →

Administrative Law Judge Dismisses FTC Complaint Against LabMD

Margaret Young Levi Federal Law Resources , , ,

electronic health recordOn November 13, 2015, the Chief Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) for the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) issued an Initial Decision dismissing the FTC’s Complaint against LabMD, Inc. for lack of evidence. The FTC originally issued this Complaint against LabMD in 2013, alleging that the clinical testing laboratory failed to provide “reasonable and appropriate” security for personal information maintained on LabMD’s computer networks and that this conduct “caused or is likely to cause” substantial consumer injury.

Continue reading →

After LabMD: FTC, What Do We Comply With?

Ann Feldkamp Triebsch Federal Law Resources, FTC Enforcement, Health Information Technology, Privacy & Security , ,

by Ann F. Triebsch

clip_image002As observers of data security enforcement are aware, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) determined on January 16, 2014, that even entities that are already subject to the privacy and security requirements of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) are also subject to FTC jurisdiction and enforcement powers for data security breaches.  In the LabMD decision, the FTC denied the motion to dismiss sought by LabMD in the administrative case against it, which was formally filed in August, 2013. This outcome, though anticipated, has stirred up plenty of discussion, including about how to know whether or not you’re storing data in a way that satisfies the FTC, and what happens if you’re not.  For entities that are subject to HIPAA and have been following the HIPAA Security Rule regulations, is this enough?  Should they be doing more to also demonstrate compliance to the FTC? Continue reading →

The FTC: Watchdog for Privacy and Security of Sensitive Personal Data

Ann Feldkamp Triebsch FTC Enforcement, Health Information Technology, HITECH Law, Privacy & Security , , , , , ,

Data transmissionThose who dwell in the world of health care privacy and security know well that the Office of Civil Rights (OCR) of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is the federal agency that issues the regulations, provides guidance and ultimately enforces the complex requirements of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic & Clinical Health Act of 2009(HITECH).  But we also know, as citizens of the 21st Century, that privacy and security concerns extend far beyond insurance claims and health records in our doctors’ offices.  With every new smartphone we indulge in, every online purchase we make, every retail loyalty program for which we register, we share valuable chunks and tidbits of data about ourselves that now can be used to tell others far more about us than we ever would have dreamed possible, or probably desire.  The internet and astounding connectivity of so many technological devices, both consumer and commercial, allow extremely private and sensitive information to be accessed by parties we do not know and cannot imagine, for both our benefit and detriment.  Continue reading →