Clustered 3 filings across 2 jurisdictions · filing window Jun 18, 2021 → Jul 15, 2021. View entity profile → Other incidents for this victim →
incident inc_04f770caf65146d4 · 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.
MT OR
HHS OCR · State AG
Earliest sighting first · deep chronology in Litigation Timeline
Apr 15, 2021 → Apr 18, 2021
When the intrusion reportedly occurred, per the linked filings
Apr 19, 2021
Reported by OREGON AG filing
Charles E. Jones, DDS PC d/b/a Jones Family Dental reported a data breach to the Oregon Attorney General. The breach was reported on 2021-06-18. The breach occurred during 4/15/2021 - 4/18/2021. The breach was discovered on 4/19/2021. 6,493 individuals were affected. Notice was sent on 6/18/2021.
Affected (this filing): 6,493
Charles E. Jones DDS PC, DBA Jones Family Dental reported to HHS on 2021-06-18 a Hacking/IT Incident affecting 6493 individuals. Breached information located on Network Server. The cyber-attack compromised PHI including names, addresses, DOB, driver's license numbers, SSNs, diagnoses, lab results, and medications. The entity notified HHS, individuals, and media, established a call center, and provided credit monitoring. Mitigation included implementing safeguards and staff retraining.
Affected (this filing): 6,493
Charles E Jones, DDS PC d/b/a Jones Family Dental reported a data breach to the Montana Attorney General. The breach was reported on 2021-07-15. The breach occurred from 4/15/2021 to 4/18/2021. 9 Montana residents were affected.
Affected (this filing): 9
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.