The new government-wide system allows the HR department to send emails to multiple agencies.
WASHINGTON – A federal judge in Washington refused to issue a temporary restraining order to the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) for the use of a new government-wide email server.
The ruling, which was held at the February 6 hearing, comes after two anonymous government officials, Jane Doe 1 and 2, filed a class action lawsuit against OPM over the use of external servers. .
Employees first took notice of the new system after receiving two test emails that said they were legal and not phishing scams.
The plaintiff states that “prohibits OPM from collecting or storing information about employees of US administrative agencies on this unknown email server or linked system until it has implemented the required PIA. He sought an injunction.
However, before the hearing took place, OPM filed a PIA on February 5th, denied the temporary restraining order claiming “MOOT” or unrelated.
Related story
The PIA cites previous OPM guidance that “when government-run websites, IT systems, or collection of information does not require privacy assessments unless information is collected or maintained in a specific format about the public.” I’m doing it.
During the hearing, DC District Court Judge Randolph Daniel Moss gave early indications that he would deny a request to shut down the server, as the complaints were based on already improved circumstances.
“The relief you wanted is that I ordered them (issuing a PIA) and they did it now,” he said.
The plaintiff’s lawyers shifted their argument by saying that the PIA was issued but did not meet the appropriate standards.
Judge Moss also rejected the assignment as it was not included in the original move. He also appeared skeptical of the claim, saying that the PIA requirements were “relatively minimal.”
The plaintiff’s lawyer once again called for a restraining order on the grounds of urgency.
“If the server stays every day, it’s likely that it will be hacked,” he said.
However, the judge dismissed the claim as “purely speculative.”
He invited the plaintiffs to file a new claim, but they agreed to do so on February 7th with something close to business.
Defenses must respond until February 11th, with the next hearing set at 11am on February 14th
