Posted on behalf of Arnold Law Firm on September 26, 2025 in Data Breach
On September 16, 2025, Retina Florida MSO, LLC d/b/a Retina Group of Florida (“RGF”) reported a data security incident to the Attorney General’s Office of Maine. The incident, which occurred between November 6 and November 9, 2024, involved unauthorized access to a portion of RGF’s internal network (the “Data Breach”). Approximately, 153,429 people have been affected.
Recently, RGF has begun sending data breach notification letters to those affected and is offering complimentary identity protection and credit monitoring services. If you received a Data Breach notification letter from RGF, it confirms that your information was potentially impacted.
Retina Group of Florida is a large multi-site ophthalmology group headquartered in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, providing specialized retinal care throughout the state. The organization is known for treating a wide range of conditions including macular degeneration, diabetic retinopathy, retinal detachments, and other diseases of the retina. The group is managed by Retina Florida MSO, LLC and operates several clinical locations across Florida. As of 2025, Retina Group of Florida employs approximately 85 individuals and generates an estimated $22.9 million in annual revenue.
RGF has not revealed the specific types of data that were compromised, but based on the nature of the incident, the information may include one or more of the following:
This information is called your Personally Identifiable Information (“PII”). It tells others about you and is considered part of your identity. Businesses are required to secure this information or risk facing statutory penalties, among other legal penalties. Stolen PII can be used by identity thieves to engage in fraudulent activity using your identity.
Personal medical information (a specific type of PII) is referred to as Protected Health Information (“PHI”). It is protected under both state and federal law. Healthcare providers and other businesses who handle PHI are required to protect that information. Like stolen PII, stolen PHI can be used by identity thieves to engage in fraudulent activity using your identity. Quite often, PII and PHI are used in conjunction by hackers.
The best way to protect yourself after a data breach is to sign up for credit and identity protection services as soon as possible.
California offers extra protections and legal rights to its residents through the California Consumer Privacy Act (“CCPA”).
NOTICE: If you received a NOTICE OF DATA BREACH letter from Retina Group of Florida, contact the Arnold Law Firm at (916) 777-7777 to discuss your legal options, or submit a confidential Case Evaluation form here.
"*" indicates required fields
The Arnold Law Firm reached a settlement in the Morgan Stanley data breach class action lawsuit. The settlement resulted in a $60 million settlement fund to benefit class members.
Learn MoreA whistleblower case exposing fraudulent practices in the state of California resulted in an $18.275 million settlement.
Learn MoreThe Arnold Law Firm reached a settlement in the Kemper and Infinity data breach class action lawsuit. The settlement is valued at over $17 million.
Learn MoreThe Arnold Law Firm is pleased to report that our attorneys received a $10.2 million verdict handed down in Modesto. Defense counsel was Kevin Cholakian of San Francisco. The defense rejected a 998 within the $1 million policy limits three years ago. The highest defense offer was $350k. The case involved a blind corner dirt […]
Learn MoreLate one spring afternoon, the Arnold Law Firm received a call from Angela, a young mother of three. She was calling from the hospital where her husband Christopher had been air-lifted for treatment of severe injuries from a tragic motor vehicle accident earlier that day. Angela’s mother, a past client of our firm, had encouraged […]
Learn MoreThe fatal collision between plaintiff’s Jeep Liberty and defendant’s Volvo truck left Ryan Eisenbrandt’s surviving wife and parents with a judgment of $3.9 million, but the defendant’s insurance company refused to pay. This resulted in a second, intense legal battle between Plaintiffs and Defendant’s insurance company. During the pendency of the wrongful death case, Defendant’s […]
Learn More