-
Oct 2, 2024 | 
mondaq.com | Matthew Westbrook |Jonian Rafti |Leslie Shanklin
On August 29, 2024, the Office for Civil Rights of the United
States Department of Health and Human Services
("HHS-OCR") withdrew its appeal of an order by the United
States District Court for the Northern District of Texas'
("District Court") declaring unlawful and vacating a
portion of an HHS-OCR Bulletin, "Use of Online Tracking Technologies by HIPAA
Covered Entities and Business Associates." See Am. Hosp. Ass'n v. Becerra, No. 4:23-cv-1110 (N.D. Tex. June 20, 2024).
-
Sep 30, 2024 | 
jdsupra.com | Jonian Rafti |Leslie Shanklin |Matthew Westbrook
[co-author: Anna Chan]On August 29, 2024, the Office for Civil Rights of the United States Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS-OCR”) withdrew its appeal of an order by the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas’ (“District Court”) declaring unlawful and vacating a portion of an HHS-OCR Bulletin, “Use of Online Tracking Technologies by HIPAA Covered Entities and Business Associates.” See Am. Hosp. Ass’n v. Becerra, No. 4:23-cv-1110 (N.D. Tex. June 20, 2024).
-
Sep 9, 2024 | 
mondaq.com | Leslie Shanklin |Jeffrey Warshafsky |Aaron Francis |Anna Chan
There has been a recent surge of privacy class action lawsuits
under the Arizona Telephone, Utility, and Communication Service
Records Act targeting the use of common email marketing analytics
technologies.
Defendants are asserting standard defenses including lack of
Article III standing as well as challenging the 2007 Arizona
law's applicability to email tracking pixels.
-
Sep 4, 2024 | 
natlawreview.com | Leslie Shanklin
There has been a recent surge of privacy class action lawsuits under the Arizona Telephone, Utility, and Communication Service Records Act targeting the use of common email marketing analytics technologies. Defendants are asserting standard defenses including lack of Article III standing as well as challenging the 2007 Arizona law’s applicability to email tracking pixels.
-
Sep 4, 2024 | 
lexology.com | Leslie Shanklin |Jeffrey Warshafsky |Aaron Francis |Anna Chan
There has been a recent surge of privacy class action lawsuits under the Arizona Telephone, Utility, and Communication Service Records Act targeting the use of common email marketing analytics technologies. Defendants are asserting standard defenses including lack of Article III standing as well as challenging the 2007 Arizona law’s applicability to email tracking pixels.
-
Jun 5, 2024 | 
cslawreport.com | Leslie Shanklin |Danielle Brooks Proskauer |Dan Frechtling Boltive |Michael HahnIab
Sorry, we do not recognise the username and password combination you have entered. Please ensure you have typed your email address correctly and remember that passwords are case sensitive. You are logged into a maximum of three different browsers/devices. Please log in with one previously used and go to My Account to manage the browsers/devices you are using. Thank you. A reset link has been sent to the email address provided.
-
May 28, 2024 | 
jdsupra.com | Leslie Shanklin |Robert Sutton
On May 16, 2024, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) announced the adoption of amendments to Regulation S-P that were proposed last year (“Final Amendments”).[1] The Final Amendments impose enhanced requirements on registered investment advisers, investment companies, broker dealers and transfer agents (“covered firms”) with respect to handling of consumer financial information.
-
May 28, 2024 | 
mondaq.com | Leslie Shanklin |Robert Sutton
On May 16, 2024, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
("SEC") announced the adoption of amendments to
Regulation S-P that were proposed last year ("Final
Amendments").1 The Final Amendments impose enhanced
requirements on registered investment advisers, investment
companies, broker dealers and transfer agents ("covered
firms") with respect to handling of consumer financial
information.
-
May 24, 2024 | 
mondaq.com | Leslie Shanklin |Jeffrey Warshafsky |Amy Gordon
Central District of California dismisses lawsuit alleging that
a third-party's interception of communications over a
website's live chat feature violated California's
wiretapping and eavesdropping prohibitions.
Important to the Court's holding was its finding that the
code used by the third party to acquire and transmit the contents
of the chat communications was not necessarily used to intercept
the communications while they were "in transit" but
rather to store them after they were received.
-
May 24, 2024 | 
lexology.com | Robert Sutton |Leslie Shanklin
On May 16, 2024, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) announced the adoption of amendments to Regulation S-P that were proposed last year (“Final Amendments”).[1] The Final Amendments impose enhanced requirements on registered investment advisers, investment companies, broker dealers and transfer agents (“covered firms”) with respect to handling of consumer financial information.
