Confirmed breach. Intrusion Oct 29, 2024, discovered Dec 4, 2024 — the first regulatory filing landed 26 days later. 520 individuals reported across the linked filings.
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.
Regulatory clocksMaine✓ ME AG ≤30d · 26dFull clock table in Litigation Timeline
State AGConfirmedLifecycle stage 2 of 3: ConfirmedUnverified claimConfirmedEnforcedlow sensitivity
Affected (total reported)
520
Data types
2
PII · Identity (basic)
Jurisdictions
2
IN ME
Linked filings
2
all State AG
Timeline
Earliest sighting first · deep chronology in Litigation Timeline
Breach window
Oct 29, 2024
When the intrusion reportedly occurred, per the linked filings
36 days
Breach discovered
Dec 4, 2024
Reported by MAINE AG filing
🏎️Indiana State AGFirst filinglinked via multistate filing link · 100%
Troxler Electronic Laboratories Inc reported a data breach to the Indiana Attorney General. The breach occurred on 2024-10-29 and was reported on 2024-12-30. 2 Indiana residents were affected. 520 individuals affected in total.
Troxler Electronic Laboratories, Inc. reported a data breach to the Maine Attorney General, indicating that an external system breach (hacking) occurred on October 29, 2024. The breach was discovered on December 4, 2024. The incident affected 520 individuals in total, including one resident of Maine. The company provided written notification to the affected individual on December 30, 2024, and offered 24 months of complimentary credit monitoring and identity protection services.
Affected (this filing): 1
ME AG ≤30d · 26d
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.