Workers Indicted for Peeping into Obama's Records
Nine employees of a Department of Education contractor face charges of taking unauthorized peeks into Obama's student loan records.
May 12, 2010 at 08:00 PM
2 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
When a famous person checks into a hospital or enrolls in college, it can be tempting for employees at those organizations to take just a little peek into the star's private records. But nine employees of a Department of Education contractor in Iowa learned the hard way that “just a peek” is actually a big invasion of privacy after they looked at President Obama's student loan records, the AP reported Wednesday.
The U.S. Attorneys' Office indicted the employees Wednesday on federal charges that they exceeded their right to access private computer records while employed by the contractor between July 2007 and March 2009. The contractor's name did not appear in any of the indictments.
If the workers are found guilty, they could be sentenced to as long as one year in prison and fined up to $100,000.
For more on “peeping,” a trending realm for data breaches, read “Breach Patrol” in the May 2009 issue of InsideCounsel.
When a famous person checks into a hospital or enrolls in college, it can be tempting for employees at those organizations to take just a little peek into the star's private records. But nine employees of a Department of Education contractor in Iowa learned the hard way that “just a peek” is actually a big invasion of privacy after they looked at President Obama's student loan records, the AP reported Wednesday.
The U.S. Attorneys' Office indicted the employees Wednesday on federal charges that they exceeded their right to access private computer records while employed by the contractor between July 2007 and March 2009. The contractor's name did not appear in any of the indictments.
If the workers are found guilty, they could be sentenced to as long as one year in prison and fined up to $100,000.
For more on “peeping,” a trending realm for data breaches, read “Breach Patrol” in the May 2009 issue of InsideCounsel.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllDemocratic State AGs Revel in Role as Last Line of Defense Against Trump Agenda
7 minute readLegal Chief of Retailer Beyond Exiting at Tumultuous Time
'The Show Must Go On': Solo-GC-of-Year Kevin Colby Pulls Off Perpetual Juggling Act
Contract Software Unicorn Ironclad Hires Former Pinterest Lawyer as GC
2 minute readTrending Stories
- 1OIG Progress Puts Connecticut in Leadership Position
- 2Bankruptcy Judge to Step Down in 2025
- 3Justices Seek Solicitor General's Views on Music Industry's Copyright Case Against ISP
- 4Judge to hear arguments on whether Google's advertising tech constitutes a monopoly
- 5'Big Law Had Become Too Woke': Why Bill Barr Moved On
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250