Last month, the Tenth Circuit upheld a grant of summary judgment in U.S. ex rel. Janssen v. Lawrence Memorial Hospital, 2020 WL 594508 (10th Cir. Feb. 7, 2020), applying the  “rigorous” and “demanding” standard of materiality for False Claims Act (“FCA”) cases established by the Supreme Court in Escobar.  In Janssen, the

In the first published enforcement action of 2020, a gastroenterology practice in Ogden, Utah, has agreed to pay a $100,000 settlement to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office for Civil Rights (“OCR”) for alleged violations of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (“HIPAA”) Security Rule.

According to the Resolution Agreement entered into between Steven A Porter, M.D., P.C. (the “Practice”) and OCR, the Practice reported a breach to OCR in 2013 due to conduct by a business associate of the Practice. While investigating the breach, OCR determined that the Practice had not implemented appropriate policies and procedures to address security violations, failed to conduct a security risk analysis, and did not have reasonable and appropriate security measures in place. Further, the Practice had used an electronic health records vendor for several years without entering into an appropriate business associate agreement.

In addition to the $100,000 payment, the Practice is required to submit to a Corrective Action Plan for a two-year period. The Corrective Action Plan requires the Practice to take a series of broad measures in furtherance of HIPAA compliance, detailed below.

Government contractors should take note of a March 4, 2020, ruling by the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals (Court) that lowers the jurisdictional threshold for establishing a claim under the False Claims Act (FCA).

The 3rd Circuit’s decision in Druding v. Care Alternatives revived an FCA claim that the U.S. District Court for the

“[P]rivacy legislation should have some kind of safe harbor provision in it so that companies understand that if they take certain steps, what they are doing is consistent with the law.”  Karen Zacharia, Chief Privacy Officer at Verizon

The California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) provides unparalleled rights for California residents with regard to data privacy.  The CCPA contains an expansive definition of “personal information” and establishes completely new data privacy entitlements for California consumers, including rights to access, delete and opt-out of the sale of personal information.  In addition, the CCPA provides new statutory damages and consumer private rights of action in the event of a data breach.

FINRA’s examination program has undergone its most significant reorganization in decades. As stated in a press release, Oct. 1, 2018, FINRA’s goal for the reorganization was to “consolidate its Examination and Risk Monitoring Programs, integrating three separate programs into a single, unified program to drive more effective oversight and greater consistency, eliminate duplication and

On January 7, 2020, the Securities and Exchange Commission’s Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations (OCIE) released its 2020 examination priorities.  OCIE is prioritizing practices, products, and services that it believes present heightened risks to investors or market integrity.  The examination priorities are organized around seven themes, many of which build on OCIE’s priorities

Across the country, school districts use technology to facilitate learning and assist in classroom management. From tracking grades and communicating with parents to monitoring bathroom breaks, technology is everywhere in our schools. But as technology becomes more prevalent in the classroom, what does that mean for student data privacy?

Federal Laws Governing Student Data Privacy

There are several federal laws that govern student data privacy. The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) protects student educational records and requires the consent of parents or students age 18 or older to consent to the release of education records. The Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment (PPRA) requires parental consent for any federally funded student survey or evaluation that requires the student to provide sensitive information. Lastly, the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) regulates companies collecting data about kids under the age of thirteen. Under the law, educational products may not require parental consent, and instead, schools can consent on behalf of parents. Importantly, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is considering updating COPPA’s regulations. The FTC requested comments on the rule in July and held a workshop in October.