Bryski v. Assignment Office et al

Filing 8

HIPAA QUALIFIED PROTECTIVE ORDER entered by Judge Harold A. Baker on 1/17/2017. (LN, ilcd) (Main Document 8 replaced on 1/17/2017) (LN, ilcd).

E-FILED

Tuesday, 17 January, 2017 12:46:32 PM
Clerk, U.S. District Court, ILCD
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
Jeffrey Bryski
Plaintiff,
v.
Assignment Office et al
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

3:16-cv-03310

HIPAA QUALIFIED PROTECTIVE ORDER
During the course of this litigation, the parties may attempt to obtain protected health
information from a covered entity. Accordingly, the Court enters this qualified protective order
regarding the disclosure of protected health information. 45 C.F.R. § 164.512(e)(1)(v).
This is not an order compelling the production of protected health information. The parties
are still required to seek that information through the lawful process applicable to discovery in any
civil case, such as through discovery requests, subpoena, and motions to compel. This order does
not relieve any party of complying with applicable notice requirements, see 45 C.F.R. §
164.512(e)(1)(ii)(A) & (iii).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED:
1) For purposes of this order, the terms “covered entity” and “protected health information”
are defined in 45 C.F.R. § 160.103.
2) This order applies to: a) any protected health information sought by a party to this lawsuit
from a covered entity pursuant to a subpoena, discovery request, or other lawful process, 45 C.F.R. §
164.512(e)(1)(ii); and, b) any protected health information for which this Court has specifically
ordered or authorized production, 45 C.F.R. § 164.512(e)(1)(i).

1

3) Anyone receiving protected health information in connection with this litigation is
prohibited from using or disclosing said information for any purpose other than this litigation.
Authorized disclosure for purposes of this litigation includes, but is not limited to, disclosure to the
necessary persons for investigation, consultation, discovery, depositions, trial, appeal, mediation,
settlement, and insurance.
4) At the end of this litigation, the parties must either return all protected health information
to the covered entity or destroy the information. This litigation ends after judgment has been
entered in this case disposing of all claims and all appeals have been resolved, if any.
5) Protected health information will not be filed under seal, unless the Court grants a motion
to seal filed by a party. CDIL-LR 5.10.
ENTERED: 1/17/2017
FOR THE COURT:
s/ Harold A. Baker
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2