Cedars-Sinai Doesn't Have Federal Officer Standing, Says Judge, Remanding Case

U.S. District Court Judge Dale Fischer for Central California granted plaintiff “John Doe’s” motion to remand a privacy case against the Cedars-Sinai health system to California Superior Court in Los Angeles, said her Monday order (docket 2:23-cv-00870). Cedars-Sinai removed the case to district court in February.

The plaintiff filed a class action in December alleging Cedars-Sinai disclosed his private information, without consent, to Meta, Microsoft Bing and other marketing and social media platforms or businesses via tracking code embedded in its website and mobile app solely for marketing purposes. He asserted the health system violated the California Invasion of Privacy Act, Confidentiality of Medical Information Act, Unfair Competition Law and common law, plus breach of contract and implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.

Cedars-Sinai contends it assisted and followed the federal government’s direction on building a nationwide health information technology structure, said the order, citing its adherence to a five-year government strategic plan to “build a culture of electronic health information access and use.” Under one government program, providers have to meet certain criteria to receive full Medicare reimbursement, including having an interoperable patient portal, the order noted.

The health system asserts it's acting under a federal officer as part of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services’ (CMS) Meaningful Use Program (MUP) (see 303270036), the order said. Doe argues the case should be remanded to state court because Cedars-Sinai “has not met its burden” of establishing that its actions were taken pursuant to a federal officer’s directions, it said. “Merely ‘performing some functions that a government agency controls is not enough to transform a private entity into a federal officer,’” the order said, citing Romeo v. Canoga Healthcare.

In its opposition to Doe’s motion for remand, Cedars-Sinai maintained it assisted the federal government in carrying out a federal directive by increasing traffic to its website, which has a link to a patient portal. It asserts it gave its patients a way to access their personal electronic health records through its patient portal and submitted reports on its involvement in the MUP to CMS.

The directions Cedars-Sinai cites are “general regulations and public directives” about development of health information technology and an electronic health records infrastructure, said the order: “Therefore, removal is not justified by federal officer jurisdiction.”