'No Persuasive Reason' for Court to Deny Remand, Says Plaintiff

for remand from U.S. District Court for Central California in Los Angeles. In a Jan. 13 complaint, John Doe alleged Cedars-Sinai shared patients’ sensitive and protected personal identifiable information with unrelated parties including Facebook, Google and Microsoft Bing without patients’ consent. Tracking code on the Cedars-Sinai website “diverted customers’ private information to outside entities for analytics and marketing purposes without adequate disclosure” or consent from customers, he alleged. Cedars-Sinai’s Feb. 3 notice of removal said defendants may remove a case under 28 U.S.C. § 1442(a) “when they are acting under color of federal office.” To do so, they must show 1) it's a “person” within the meaning of the statute, 2) there's a causal nexus between its actions, taken pursuant to a federal officer’s directions, and plaintiff’s claims; and 3) it can assert a “colorable federal defense.” Since 2004, the federal government has directed and overseen a public-private initiative to develop a nationwide infrastructure for health information technology, and Cedars-Sinai “dutifully assisted and followed the federal government’s direction in this effort” with a “Meaningful Use” program to increase patients’ use of electronic health records, it said. In his Friday response, John Doe said the argument that the hospital was acting on behalf of the federal government “lacks credibility.” Doe sued Cedars-Sinai Dec. 30 for violations of California’s Invasion of Privacy Act, invasion of privacy/intrusion upon seclusion in violation of California common law, breach of implied contract and covenant, negligence and violation of California’s Confidentiality of Medical Information Act.