Onsite Mammography Settlement: Claims Closed, Awaiting Court Approval
At a glance
- Status
- Pending final approval
- Defendant
- Onsite Mammography, LLC d/b/a Onsite Women's Health
- Settlement fund
- $2,525,000
- Claim deadline
- August 11, 2026
- No-proof cash option
- Yes — pro rata cash payment (amount varies with number of claims filed), no documentation required, or up to $5,000.00 in documented, unreimbursed out-of-pocket losses
- Max documented payout
- $5,000
- Administrator
- Eisner Advisory Group LLC
- Official site
- www.onsitesettlement.com
- Court
- United States District Court, District of Massachusetts
- Case number
- 3:25-CV-11123-MGM
Last verified September 27, 2026
Key dates
| Milestone | Date | What it means |
|---|---|---|
| Claim deadline | August 11, 2026(passed) | Last day to file for a payment |
| Opt-out (exclusion) deadline | July 13, 2026(passed) | Last day to leave the settlement and keep the right to sue |
| Objection deadline | July 13, 2026(passed) | Last day to object to the terms |
| Final approval hearing | September 9, 2026(passed) | When the judge decides whether to approve the settlement |
| Expected payout | Not yet scheduled | Payments are not sent until after final approval and any appeals |
Where to file
Onsite Mammography Data Breach Settlement (Clarkson v. Onsite Mammography) is administered by Eisner Advisory Group LLC. The only place to file is the official settlement website:
Verify on the official sitewww.onsitesettlement.com
Filing is free. No legitimate settlement charges a fee to file a claim.
You cannot file on RecordingLaw.com. We are an independent publisher, not the settlement administrator, and we are not affiliated with any court, agency, or defendant.
The Onsite Mammography data breach settlement (Clarkson v. Onsite Mammography) is no longer accepting claims. The deadline to submit a claim was August 11, 2026. The court held the Final Approval Hearing on September 9, 2026 at 12:00 p.m. ET. The court's docket shows orders and a judgment entered on September 16 and September 22, 2026, but as of September 23, 2026 the text of those orders was not available to us and the official settlement site had posted no update, so we have not confirmed whether final approval was granted or when payments will issue.
If you received a notice that your information may have been involved in the October 2024 breach at Onsite Mammography, LLC, doing business as Onsite Women's Health, you may be part of the settlement class. Below is what actually happened, what people who filed can realistically expect to receive, and where things stand now that the filing window has closed.
What happened
Onsite Mammography, LLC, which operates as Onsite Women's Health, provides mobile mammography and imaging services to patients and healthcare facilities. In October 2024, the company discovered that an unauthorized third party had accessed one employee's email account.
The account was compromised through a phishing email, a message designed to trick an employee into handing over login credentials. A forensic review determined that patients' private information, potentially including protected health information, may have been exposed as a result.
The resulting lawsuit, Clarkson v. Onsite Mammography, LLC, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, case number 3:25-CV-11123-MGM. That case led to the settlement whose claim window has now closed.
Where things stand right now
This settlement is no longer accepting claims. The deadline was August 11, 2026.
The window to exclude yourself from the class, known as opting out, and the window to object to the settlement's terms both closed on July 13, 2026. Opting out means leaving the class to keep your own right to sue Onsite separately, but it also means giving up any payment from this fund. Objecting means staying in the class while telling the court you think the deal is unfair. Both options are gone now, and so is filing a claim: that window closed on August 11, 2026.
The court had already given preliminary approval to the settlement, which is why the claims process ran when it did. The Final Approval Hearing was held on September 9, 2026, at 12:00 p.m. ET, where the judge heard the request to grant final approval. The court's docket shows orders and a judgment entered on September 16 and September 22, 2026. As of September 23, 2026 the text of those orders was not available to us and the official settlement site had posted no post-hearing update, so we have not confirmed whether final approval was granted, and no payment date has been announced.
Who's in the class
You may be part of the settlement class if Onsite Women's Health notified you that your information was involved in the October 2024 breach. The class covers an estimated 357,265 patients across the United States whose private information, potentially including protected health information, may have been accessed.
If you are unsure whether you received a notice, check the official settlement site directly rather than a search result or an unexpected text message.
How much people can realistically get
The settlement gives class members two main cash options, plus a separate monitoring benefit.
The first option requires no documentation: a pro rata cash payment. Pro rata means the dollar amount is not fixed. It depends on how many people file valid claims and what the court approves for fees and costs, so nobody can promise a number in advance.
The second option is reimbursement for documented, unreimbursed out-of-pocket losses tied to the breach, capped at up to $5,000. According to the official settlement FAQ, eligible costs can include things like credit report or credit-freeze fees, notary charges, postage, copying, mileage, and phone charges incurred on or after October 2024. That $5,000 figure is a ceiling, not a typical payout. Most documented-loss claims will be far smaller, and every dollar figure here is still subject to pro-rata adjustment.
Separately from either cash option, class members may also elect Credit and Medical/Healthcare Data Monitoring and Insurance Services. According to the official settlement site, this benefit runs for three years, includes monitoring at all three credit bureaus plus healthcare data monitoring, and comes with $1 million in identity theft insurance, all at no cost to class members.
Beyond the three free years
A credit freeze at Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion is free and is the first step. If you elected the three years of credit and medical data monitoring with $1 million in identity theft insurance on your claim form, start there. After those three years, or for alerts the settlement benefit does not list, such as unusual spending on the bank and card accounts you link, you could look at Aura, a paid service.
Learn About AuraAffiliate disclosure: if you sign up through this link we may earn a commission, at no extra cost to you. Learn more
What proof you need
The no-documentation cash payment needs nothing beyond a completed claim form. You do not need receipts to choose that option.
The documented-loss reimbursement, up to $5,000, needs records connecting your claimed loss to this breach: receipts, statements, or similar proof of an actual, unreimbursed cost incurred on or after October 2024.
The monitoring and insurance benefit does not require proof of a loss either. It is an election you make on the claim form.
How to file
Filing ran entirely through the official settlement site for this case, and that site is still the place to check the status of a claim already filed. The claim form asked you to identify yourself, confirm you received notice, and choose which benefits you wanted: the no-proof cash payment, the documented-loss reimbursement, the monitoring benefit, or a combination where the settlement allowed it. The deadline to submit was August 11, 2026, and it has passed.
Protect yourself now: freeze your credit first
Whether or not you file a claim, the most useful free step after a breach like this is a credit freeze at all three major bureaus: Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion. A freeze blocks new credit from being opened in your name, and by federal law, placing, lifting, and removing one is free and does not affect your credit score. Our guide to freezing your credit after a data breach walks through the steps at each bureau.
If you elect the settlement's three-year credit and medical data monitoring benefit, treat it as a second layer on top of a freeze, not a replacement for one. Monitoring tells you after something has already happened; a freeze helps stop it from happening in the first place.
If you already see signs of misuse, such as accounts you do not recognize or unfamiliar hard inquiries, IdentityTheft.gov, the FTC's free recovery site, builds a personalized recovery plan at no cost.
More open and closed settlements
If Onsite Mammography is not the only breach notice you have received, our data breach settlement tracker lists the settlements we have verified, open and closed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is the Onsite Mammography data breach settlement still accepting claims?
No. The claim deadline was August 11, 2026, and the Onsite Mammography data breach settlement is no longer accepting claims. The court held the final approval hearing on September 9, 2026, and the docket shows a judgment entered on September 22, 2026; as of September 23, 2026 we had not confirmed its terms or any payment date.
What caused the Onsite Mammography data breach?
An unauthorized third party accessed an Onsite Women's Health employee's email account through a phishing email in October 2024, and the Onsite Mammography data breach settlement resolves claims that patients' private information, potentially including protected health information, was exposed as a result.
Who is included in the Onsite Mammography settlement class?
You may be part of the Onsite Mammography settlement class if Onsite Women's Health notified you that your information was involved in the October 2024 breach; the class covers an estimated 357,265 patients.
How much does the Onsite Mammography settlement pay?
The Onsite Mammography settlement offers a pro rata cash payment with no documentation, or reimbursement of up to $5,000 for documented, unreimbursed out-of-pocket losses; amounts are estimates subject to pro-rata adjustment, and most documented claims will be well below the $5,000 cap.
Does the Onsite Mammography settlement include credit monitoring?
Yes. According to the official settlement site, the Onsite Mammography settlement lets class members elect three years of credit and medical/healthcare data monitoring with $1 million in identity theft insurance, at no cost.
Can I still opt out of or object to the Onsite Mammography settlement?
No. The deadline to exclude yourself from the Onsite Mammography settlement class or to object to its terms was July 13, 2026, and the claim deadline of August 11, 2026 has passed as well, so no step remains available.
Has the Onsite Mammography settlement received final approval?
Not confirmed. The court held the Final Approval Hearing for the Onsite Mammography settlement on September 9, 2026 at 12:00 p.m. ET, and the docket shows orders and a judgment entered on September 16 and September 22, 2026. As of September 23, 2026 the text of those orders was not available to us and the official settlement site had posted no update, so check the official site for the outcome; no payment date has been announced.
What proof do I need to file an Onsite Mammography settlement claim?
None, if you choose the Onsite Mammography settlement's pro rata cash payment. The documented-loss option, capped at up to $5,000, requires records showing an actual, unreimbursed cost connected to the breach.
What should I do if I am not sure whether I got a notice about the Onsite Mammography breach?
Check the official Onsite Mammography settlement site directly rather than a search result or unexpected text message, and regardless of your claim status, place a free credit freeze at Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion.
How to tell a settlement notice is real
Check the case name, case number, and court against the official settlement site. Go to that site directly instead of clicking a link in an email or text. Nobody legitimate will call, text, or email out of the blue asking for your Social Security number, bank account, or card details, and nobody will charge you to file. Report anyone who does at ReportFraud.ftc.gov.
Already have a notice with a link or sender address? Paste it into our settlement notice checker to compare it with the official claim sites we track.
Informational only. Not legal, tax, or financial advice, and not affiliated with any settlement.
RecordingLaw.com is an independent legal-information publisher. We are not a law firm, not a settlement administrator, and not affiliated with, endorsed by, or acting on behalf of any court, government agency, defendant, or claims administrator described on this page. Reading this page does not create an attorney-client relationship.
We do not process claims and we never collect your claim information. You cannot file a claim on RecordingLaw.com. To file, opt out, object, or check your status, use only the official settlement administrator identified above. We link to it for your convenience.
Filing a legitimate claim is free. No legitimate settlement or administrator will charge you a fee to file, or ask for your Social Security number, bank, or card details by unsolicited call, text, or email. If someone does, it is likely a scam. Report it at ReportFraud.ftc.gov.
Deadlines, amounts, and approval status change and are set by the court. We verify against the official administrator and court records, but confirm the current details on the official site before acting. Nothing here guarantees eligibility, a payment, or any amount. Settlement payments may be taxable. See IRS Publication 4345. and consult a tax professional. For advice about your specific situation, consult a licensed attorney in your state. Affiliate disclosure.
Updates
Updated the case status: the court's docket shows orders and a judgment entered on September 16 and 22, 2026 after the final approval hearing; we have not yet confirmed the outcome or a payment date.
Updated settlement status and dates: Title 'Claims Closed, Hearing Sept 9' (reads as an upcoming date) now 'Claims Closed, Awaiting Court Approval'
Updated settlement status and dates: Title said 'Claims Open' now 'Claims Closed, Hearing Sept 9'. Official site read 2026-09-09: claims August 11, 2026; exclusion and objection July 13, 2026; Fairness Hearing September 09, 2026 (FAQ 11: hearing at 12:00pm
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on the statutory provisions below, held in our own legal record and retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 93H
§ 3Duty to report known security breach or unauthorized use of personal informationIn forcecited in 3 of our articles
Section 3. (a) A person or agency that maintains or stores, but does not own or license data that includes personal information about a resident of the commonwealth, shall provide notice, as soon as practicable and without unreasonable delay, when such person or agency (1) knows or has reason to know of a breach of security or (2) when the person or agency knows or has reason to know that the personal information of such resident was acquired or used by an unauthorized person or used for an unauthorized purpose, to the owner or licensor in accordance with this chapter. In addition to providing notice as provided herein, such person or agency shall cooperate with the owner or licensor of such information.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at malegislature.gov
Cited in 3 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2019
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Adams v. Congress Auto Insurance Agency (Massachusetts Superior Court 2013, 31 Mass. L. Rptr. 473)“…where an unauthorized person accesses personal information. G.L.c. 93H, §§3, 4. Adams does not argue or allege that…”
- Elliott-Lewis v. Laboratories (District Court, District of Columbia 2019, 378 F. Supp. 3d 67)“…ndeed, Abbott was required to send the notice by law. See Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93H, § 3. Elliott-Lewis's claim for invasion o…”
- Elliott-Lewis v. Abbott Laboratories (District Court, D. Massachusetts 2019)“…ott was required to send the notice by law. See Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93H, § 3. Elliott-Lewis’s…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Massachusetts Data Privacy Laws: Security Rules & Consumer Rights (2026), Massachusetts Data Breach Notification Laws: Reporting Rules & Timelines (2026)
Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 93A
§ 11Persons engaged in business; actions for unfair trade practices; class actions; damages; injunction; costsIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
Section 11. Any person who engages in the conduct of any trade or commerce and who suffers any loss of money or property, real or personal, as a result of the use or employment by another person who engages in any trade or commerce of an unfair method of competition or an unfair or deceptive act or practice declared unlawful by section two or by any rule or regulation issued under paragraph (c) of section two may, as hereinafter provided, bring an action in the superior court, or in the housing court as provided in section three of chapter one hundred and eighty-five C, whether by way of original complaint, counterclaim, cross-claim or third-party action for damages and such equitable relief, including an injunction, as the court deems to be necessary and proper. Such person, if he has not suffered any loss of money or property, may obtain such an injunction if it can be shown that the aforementioned unfair method of competition, act or practice may have the effect of causing such loss of money or property.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at malegislature.gov
Cited in 1,152 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Nader v. Citron (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court 1977, 372 Mass. 96)“…J. This case presents questions about the scope of G. L. c. 93A, § 11, which gives a private cause of…”
- International Fidelity Insurance v. Wilson (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court 1983, 387 Mass. 841)“…L. c. 93A count, and for attorneys’ fees of $19,990 under G. L. c. 93A, § 11. The judge also determined, based on th…”
- Uno Restaurants, Inc. v. Boston Kenmore Realty Corp. (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court 2004, 441 Mass. 376)“…oston Kenmore engaged in “wilful” deception, as required by G. L. c. 93A, § 11. “Wilful” conduct is not required to sh…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Punitive Damages in Massachusetts: Statute-Only Rule (2026)
Search our full record of US law — 2.1 million sections, every state + federal →
Sources and References
- United States District Court, District of Massachusetts (official court site)(mad.uscourts.gov).gov
- Breach Portal: Notice to the Secretary of HHS Breach of Unsecured Protected Health Information, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office for Civil Rights(ocrportal.hhs.gov).gov
- IdentityTheft.gov, Federal Trade Commission(identitytheft.gov).gov
- Credit Freezes and Fraud Alerts, Consumer Advice, Federal Trade Commission(consumer.ftc.gov).gov
- Clarkson, et al. v. Onsite Mammography, LLC, d/b/a Onsite Women's Health, official settlement site(onsitesettlement.com)
- Frequently Asked Questions, Onsite Mammography Data Breach Settlement (official)(onsitesettlement.com)
- Nadeau v. Onsite Mammography, LLC, No. 3:25-cv-11123-MGM (D. Mass.), docket (lead consolidated case), CourtListener RECAP(courtlistener.com)