"[T]he court emphasized that the plain language of the Encryption Rule only requires that a covered entity have a 'mechanism' for encryption in place; a covered entity's failure to encrypt three devices did not mean that it 'never implemented 'a mechanism' to encrypt anything at all.' ... The court held that HHS could not prove that M.D. Anderson 'disclosed' ePHI 'without proving that someone 'outside' the entity received it,' a standard that the agency conceded could not be met in that case, and that would be difficult to meet generally." [Univ. of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center v. HHS, No. 19-60226 (5th Cir. Jan. 14, 2021)]