Clustered 3 filings across 3 jurisdictions · filing window Nov 28, 2025 → Apr 2, 2026. View entity profile → Other incidents for this victim →
incident inc_42ccb9f8ffd54156 · merge_method human · confidence 100%
Gap between first leak claim and first regulatory filing
Time between earliest and latest filing
Not recorded for this incident
Discovery variance · Materiality delta · SEC filing delay — no SEC 8-K in this cluster; needs two dated filings.
Health (basic) · Identity (basic)
IL VT
Leak Site · HHS OCR · State AG
Earliest sighting first · deep chronology in Litigation Timeline
Southern Illinois Dermatology, founded in 1996 by Board-Certified Dr. Ted G. Van Acker, has grown from one office to 15 locations. We offer general, surgical, cosmetic dermatology and advanced laser treatments with attentive, professional care.
Southern Illinois Dermatology notified Vermont consumers of a data breach involving unauthorized access to patient records. The incident compromised personal information including names, addresses, Social Security numbers, and dates of birth. The healthcare provider established a toll-free response line and advised affected individuals to place fraud alerts or security freezes on their credit files. The breach notice was filed with the Vermont Attorney General's office on April 2, 2026.
Southern Illinois Dermatology (IL) reported to HHS OCR on 2026-04-02 a Hacking/IT Incident affecting 160,312 individuals. Breached information was located on a Network Server. No business associate was identified as present. No further detail was provided in the HHS web description.
Affected (this filing): 160,312
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.