Coast of Maine Brands reported a data breach to the Indiana Attorney General. The breach occurred on 2024-06-11 and was reported on 2025-02-27. 1 Indiana residents were affected. 30 individuals affected in total.
Affected (this filing): 30
Clustered 2 filings across 2 jurisdictions · filing window Feb 27, 2025 → Mar 3, 2025. View entity profile → Other incidents for this victim →
incident inc_c666eab41351422b · 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.
Identity (basic) · Financial account
IN MD
all State AG
Earliest sighting first · deep chronology in Litigation Timeline
Jun 11, 2024
When the intrusion reportedly occurred, per the linked filings
Jun 20, 2024
Reported by MARYLAND AG filing
Coast of Maine Brands reported a data breach to the Indiana Attorney General. The breach occurred on 2024-06-11 and was reported on 2025-02-27. 1 Indiana residents were affected. 30 individuals affected in total.
Affected (this filing): 30
Coast of Maine Brands notified the Maryland Attorney General on March 3, 2025, regarding a data event affecting approximately two Maryland residents. Between June 11 and June 20, 2024, an unknown actor gained unauthorized access to an employee's email account, potentially downloading name and payment card information. Coast of Maine engaged third-party forensic specialists, notified affected individuals on February 27, 2025, and provided 12 months of complimentary credit monitoring through Experian.
Affected (this filing): 2
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.