New Age Dermatology Inc reported a data breach to the Indiana Attorney General. The breach occurred on 2025-12-30 and was reported on 2026-02-23. 4 Indiana residents were affected. 8,387 individuals affected in total.
Affected (this filing): 8,387
Clustered 2 filings across 2 jurisdictions · filing window Feb 23, 2026 → Feb 25, 2026. View entity profile → Other incidents for this victim →
incident inc_0305d5aab4ab4f77 · merge_method deterministic · confidence 100%
Discovered → first regulatory filing
Time between earliest and latest filing
Not recorded for this incident
Discovery variance · Leak precedence · Materiality delta · SEC filing delay — no leak-site claim in this cluster; no SEC 8-K in this cluster; needs two dated filings.
IN NH
all State AG
Earliest sighting first · deep chronology in Litigation Timeline
Dec 30, 2025
When the intrusion reportedly occurred, per the linked filings
Dec 30, 2025
Reported by NEW HAMPSHIRE AG filing
New Age Dermatology Inc reported a data breach to the Indiana Attorney General. The breach occurred on 2025-12-30 and was reported on 2026-02-23. 4 Indiana residents were affected. 8,387 individuals affected in total.
Affected (this filing): 8,387
New Age Dermatology LLC reported a ransomware incident affecting an internal server on or about December 30, 2025. The breach impacted 3 New Hampshire residents, potentially exposing PHI and PII (names, DOB, SSN). The organization engaged forensic investigators, notified law enforcement, and is offering 12 months of IDX identity protection. No evidence of EHR compromise or misuse was found at the time of filing.
Affected (this filing): 3
About this clustering
DisclosureLens links filings into incidents through layered matchers: deterministic rules (same source document, multistate filings of one breach, tight-window same-victim pairs), a weighted-similarity scorer for cross-source candidates, and an operator review queue for everything uncertain. Each link records its own method and confidence — shown per filing in the timeline below. The system defaults to NOT merging when uncertain, because a false merge (collapsing two unrelated breaches) is more harmful than a false split (showing related filings separately); uncertain pairs route to human review instead of auto-merging. Filing summaries shown in the timeline are AI-generated extracts — verify each against its linked source.