BMIS 570
CASE STUDY ASSIGNMENT INSTRUCTIONS
OVERVIEW:
You will write a 4–5-page paper in current APA format that focuses on 2 case studies from each
week’s reading. Each paper must include at least 4 references in addition to the course textbooks
and the Bible. Each week there is a different set of cases for you to review. You must review
them separately following the instructions below:
INSTRUCTIONS:
1. State the facts of the case
o What happened in this case?
o Who are the parties?
o What motivated the parties to take this action?
o List the facts by level of importance.
2. Discuss the Issue: Discuss the issues or problems presented by the case. The legal issue
is the question of law on which resolution of the case turns. An issue should be presented
in the form of a question. While most cases revolve around a legal issue, you should also
consider issues of public policy, values in conflict, and practical reality. For example, a
case study involving abortion might involve the following issues:
o Legal: Is abortion legal? If so, under what circumstances?
o Public Policy: Should abortion be legal? Why or why not?
o Values in Conflict: Which value is more important, a woman's right to privacy or
an unborn child's right to life? Why?
o Practical: What are the options open to someone faced with an unwanted
pregnancy? Where can someone in this situation go for help and advice?
3. Discuss the Arguments: Now that you have defined the facts and issues, develop and
discuss the arguments that can be made for each of the various points of view. For
example, what are the arguments, both Pro and Con, for each point of view, which side
provides the most compelling argument, and why, and what are the consequences?
4. Biblical Integration and Technology: Look at each of these cases from a from a
Christian and Technology prospective. How do these cases and their decisions impact
Christianity, Technology, and society? If the impact is negative, what recommendations
would you make to overcome that impact? Finally, provide explanations to problems
associated with health information technology.
5. Conclusion: Each of these cases has a court ruling. Do you agree with the court’s
decision (why or why not?).
Submit each Case Study by 11:59 p.m. (ET) on Sunday of every module/week.
C R P
Introduction, Idea Exploration
Expansion & Conclusion
1. The introduction provides
sufficient background on the
topic and previews major
points. 2. The paper’s
organization emphasizes the
central theme or purpose.
3. The conclusion logically
derives from the paper’s
ideas. 4. The conclusion
reviews the major points
toward the appropriate
audience. 5. The key legal
issues are thoroughly
presented with rich detail.
6. Written ideas flow in an
effective, logical and
organized manner. There is a
mostly logical progression of
claims from introduction to
conclusion.
20 to >18.0 pts
Advanced
Student’s
introduction and
written analysis
effectively
provides
advanced
background on
the topic of the
paper. The
central theme or
purpose of the
paper is
emphasized
throughout in
advanced detail.
The conclusion
is well written
and logically
derives from the
paper’s ideas
and reviews the
major points
toward the
appropriate
audience. The
key legal issues
are thoroughly
presented in
advanced and
rich detail. The
written ideas
flow in a highly
effective, logical
and organized
manner. There is
an advanced
logical
progression of
claims from
introduction to
conclusion.
18 to >15.0 pts
Proficient
Student’s
introduction and
written analysis is
proficient and
provides
sufficient
background on
the topic of the
paper. The
central theme or
purpose of the
paper is
sufficient and the
development of
theme is
emphasized in
different areas of
the written
analysis. The
conclusion is
written in a
proficient manner
and addresses
most of the major
points and
logically draws
upon most
aspects of the
paper’s ideas.
The key legal
issues are
discussed,
presented, and
developed in a
proficient manner
in different areas
of the written
analysis. The
written ideas flow
in a mostly logical
and organized
manner. There is
a mostly
proficient and
logical
progression of
ideas from
introduction to
conclusion.
15 to >0.0 pts
Developing
Student’s introduction
and written analysis is
developmental and
medium level. The
analysis provides
some aspects or
minimal background
on the topic and major
points of the paper.
The central theme or
purpose of the paper is
developing, disparate
and is insufficiently
developed throughout
the written analysis.
The conclusion is not
fully developed and
does not fully and
logically draw upon
most aspects of the
paper’s ideas or
reviews the major
points. The key legal
issues are presented
at a medium level of
exploration and is not
developed in full detail
throughout the written
analysis. The written
ideas are sometimes
unorganized,
disconnected and
there is not always a
smooth progression of
claims from
introduction to
conclusion. Some
sources are
authoritative, but, not
all.
0 pts
Not Present
No written
analysis
presented
for this
requirement
20 pts
Case Study Grading Rubric | BMIS570_B01_202230
C R P
Foundation of Knowledge
1. All key theories and
elements of the assignment
are covered in a substantive
way. 2. Content is
comprehensive, accurate,
and/or persuasive.
Authoritative, persuasive, and
statesmanlike voice 3. Major
points are stated clearly and
are supported by professional
literature or logic.
4. Meaningful use of source
material and analytical
reasoning to elaborate upon
the topic or theme is present.
5. Research is adequate,
contemporary and timely for
the topic and relevant
industry. 6. The context and
purpose of the writing is clear.
15 to >14.0 pts
Advanced
Student’s written
analysis
effectively
covers all key
legal theories
and elements of
the assignment
topic in an
advanced and
substantive way.
The content is
comprehensive,
accurate, and/or
persuasive. The
arguments made
throughout the
paper are clear
and convincing,
presenting a
persuasive claim
in a distinctive
and compelling
manner. The
major points are
stated clearly in
an advanced
manner and are
supported by
professional
literature or
logic. Synthesis
of source
information is
present and
advanced in
nature.
Arguments show
logical
progressions.
There is a
meaningful use
of source
material and
analytical
reasoning to
elaborate upon
the topic or
theme is
present. All
sources are
14 to >11.0 pts
Proficient
Student’s written
analysis covered
most aspects of
the key legal
theories and
elements
presented in
proficient
manner. It is
substantive and
provides
sufficient
background on
the topic for the
paper. The
content is
proficient, mostly
accurate, and/or
persuasive. The
arguments made
throughout the
paper are
adequate,
convincing,
presenting a
satisfactory claim
in a distinctive
and strong
manner. The
major points are
stated in an
accurate manner
and are
supported by
professional
literature or logic.
Synthesis of
source
information is
present and
proficient in
nature.
Arguments show
logical
progressions.
There is a
proficient and
effective use of
source material
and analytical
11 to >0.0 pts
Developing
Student’s written
analysis provides
minimal depth to the
topic presented and is
developmental in its
overall scope. Key
legal theories are
absent in the analysis.
The analysis
ineffectively covers
key theories and
elements of the
assignment topic in an
incomplete and
non-substantive way.
The content is
developmental in
nature, contains some
non- persuasive
elements. The
arguments made
throughout the paper
are not fully adequate,
convincing, or present
a satisfactory claim in
a distinctive or
authoritative manner.
The major points are
stated in a developing
manner and are not
always supported by
professional literature
or logic. Synthesis of
source information is
of medium to low
quality in nature.
Argument shows
logical progressions.
Some aspects and
techniques of
argumentation are
evident. There is an
insufficient and
ineffective use of
source material and
analytical reasoning to
expand upon the topic
or theme that is
presented. Some
sources are not
0 pts
Not Present
No written
analysis
presented
for this
requirement.
15 pts
Case Study Grading Rubric | BMIS570_B01_202230
C R P
authoritative.
The research is
current, timely,
relevant, and
directly
applicable to
contemporary
situation in the
industry and
topic of
discussion. The
context and
purpose of the
writing is clear.
reasoning to
elaborate upon
the topic or
theme is present.
Most sources are
authoritative.
The research is
progressive,
timely, relevant,
and mostly
applicable to the
contemporary
situation in the
industry and the
topic of
discussion.
authoritative or
authoritative sources
are missing. The
research is not fully
progressive and/or
relevant or fully
applicable to the
contemporary situation
in the industry and the
topic of discussion.
Case Study Grading Rubric | BMIS570_B01_202230
C R P
Personal Perspective &
Biblical Integration
1. Incorporates Biblical
Scriptures and Christian
Worldview perspective. Draws
support from experience and
information not available from
assigned sources. Compares
biblical doctrine and theology
to legal subject matter where
appropriate. 2. Student
integrates his/her own
thinking through thought
provoking analysis.
7 to >6.0 pts
Advanced
Student
incorporated
specific Biblical
Scriptures (at
least 4 to 5
minimum) and
Christian
Worldview
perspective
throughout the
written analysis.
Student
presented
advanced
comparative
analysis of
biblical doctrine
that is related to
the legal subject
matter being
discussed.
Student drew a
broad base of
support from
experience and
information not
available from
assigned
sources.
Student
integrated
his/her own
thinking through
thought
provoking
analysis.
6 to >4.0 pts
Proficient
Student
incorporated
sufficient Biblical
Scriptures (at
least 2 to 3) and
Christian
Worldview
perspective in
most areas of the
written analysis.
Student
presented
sufficient
comparative
analysis of
biblical doctrine
that is related to
subject legal
matter being
discussed. Draws
some level of
support from
experience and
information not
available from
assigned
sources. Student
integrated his/her
own thinking
through thought
provoking
analysis.
4 to >0.0 pts
Developing
Student incorporated a
minimum amount of
specific Biblical
Scriptures (less than
2) and Christian
Worldview perspective
throughout the written
analysis. Student
presented marginal
comparative analysis
of biblical doctrine that
is related to subject
legal matter being
discussed. Student
drew some support
from experience and
information not
available from
assigned sources.
Biblical integration may
or may not be found.
Student integrated a
minimum amount of
his/her own thinking
through thought
provoking analysis.
0 pts
Not Present
No written
analysis
presented
for this
requirement.
7 pts
Format & References
1. The paper is at least 4 to 5
pages, inclusive of both case
studies. 2. The layout of the
paper is effective, and uses
reader-friendly aids where
needed. 3. The reference
page contains at least 4
scholarly citations for each
case study, in addition to the
course textbook. 4. The
paper follows current APA
8 to >7.0 pts
Advanced
The body of the
paper is at least
4 to 5 pages,
separate from
the cover page,
reference page
or other element.
The layout of
the paper is
7 to >5.0 pts
Proficient
The body of the
paper is at least 4
to 5 pages,
separate from the
cover page,
reference page or
other element.
The layout of the
paper is good
5 to >0.0 pts
Developing
The body of the paper
does not meet the
criteria of at least 4 to
5 pages, separate
from the cover page,
reference page or
other element. The
written analysis of the
material presented by
0 pts
Not Present
No written
analysis
presented
for this
requirement.
8 pts
Case Study Grading Rubric | BMIS570_B01_202230
C R P
format guidelines. 5. The
paper is written in 12pt font,
Times New Roman, is
double-spaced, and has 1”
margins. 6. The work is
original, giving credit to all
borrowed ideas.
highly effective
and
well-designed
and uses
reader-friendly
aids where
needed. The
written analysis
of the material
presented by the
course readings
(internal
sources) as well
as other
academically
approved
sources
(external) are
utilized in most
aspects of the
paper. The
reference page
contains at least
4 scholarly
citations for each
case study. The
paper meets the
current APA
guideline and is
written in 12pt
font, Times New
Roman, is
double-spaced,
and has 1”
margins. The
work is original
and advanced,
giving credit to
all borrowed
ideas.
and proficiently
designed and
uses some
reader-friendly
aids where
needed. The
written analysis
of the material
presented by the
course readings
(internal sources)
as well as other
academically
approved
sources
(external) are
utilized in a
proficient manner
in most aspects
of the paper. The
reference page
contains some of
the requirements
of at least 4
scholarly citation
for each case
study, but not
fully. The paper
meets most
aspects of the
current APA
guideline. The
paper is written in
12pt font, Times
New Roman, is
double-spaced,
and has 1”
margins. The
work is original
and proficient,
giving credit to
most borrowed
ideas.
the course readings
(internal sources) as
well as other
academically approved
sources (external) are
not fully city correctly
or utilized in most
aspects of the paper.
The reference page
contains some of the
requirements of at
least 4 scholarly
citations, but, is
insufficient. The paper
(does not) fully meet
the current APA
guidelines and is (or is
not) written in 12pt
font, Times New
Roman, is
double-spaced, and
has irregular margins.
The work lacks full
originality and
proficiency and does
not give credit to all
borrowed ideas.
Case Study Grading Rubric | BMIS570_B01_202230
C R P
Grammar/Puncuation/Spelling
Rules of grammar, usage,
and punctuation are followed.
Spelling is correct.
5 to >4.0 pts
Advanced
The written
analysis
cohesive and
there was no
grammar or
spelling issues
found.
4 to >3.0 pts
Proficient
The written
analysis was
proficient and
there were few
grammar or
spelling issues
found.
3 to >0.0 pts
Developing
The written analysis
contained some
grammar and spelling
issues. Grammar or
spelling issues were
notable but did not
prevent the reader
from understanding the
key aspects of the
paper.
0 pts
Not Present
No written
analysis
presented
for this
requirement.
5 pts
Case Study Grading Rubric | BMIS570_B01_202230
C R P
Readability/Style
1. Sentences are complete,
clear, and concise.
2. Sentences are
well-constructed with
consistently strong and varied
structure. 3. Sentence
transitions are present and
direct the flow of thought.
4. Words used are precise
and unambiguous. 5. Ideas
flow in a logical sequence.
6. The structure of the paper
is clear and easy to follow
7. Paragraph transitions are
present, logical, and direct the
flow of thought throughout the
paper.
5 to >4.0 pts
Advanced
The writing
analysis includes
sentences that
are written at a
highly advanced
level, complete,
clear, and
concise. The
sentences are
well-constructed
with consistently
strong and
varied structure.
The
sentence
transitions are
present and
direct the flow of
thought. The
words used are
precise and
unambiguous
throughout the
paper. The
written ideas
flow in a highly
logical and
well-organized
manner.
Paragraph
transitions are
present, highly
logical, and
direct the flow of
thought
throughout the
paper.
4 to >3.0 pts
Proficient
The writing
analysis includes
sentences that
are proficient in
nature, relatively
complete, clear
and concise.
The sentences
are sufficiently
well-constructed
with consistently
strong and varied
structure. The
sentence
transitions are
sufficiently
present and
direct the flow of
thought. The
words used are
detailed and
explicit in most
aspects of the
paper. The
structure of the
paper is clear
and easy to
follow and
emphasizes the
central theme or
purpose.
Paragraph
transitions are
evident,
reasonable, and
direct the flow of
thought
throughout the
paper.
3 to >0.0 pts
Developing
The writing analysis
includes sentences
that are developmental
in nature, and contains
instances of
incomplete and
unclear thought, and
that are not always
concise. The
sentences are not
always constructed or
involves inconsistent,
and varied structure.
Some sentence
transitions are not
present and does not
always direct the flow
of thought. The words
used are not always
precise and are
ambiguous at times.
The structure of the
paper is intermittent
and has some
disconnections in
terms of clarity and is
not always easy to
follow or does not
always and emphasize
the central theme or
purpose. Paragraph
transitions are not
always evident,
acceptable, or fully
direct the flow of
thought throughout the
paper.
0 pts
Not Present
No written
analysis
presented
for this
requirement.
5 pts
Total Points: 60
Case Study Grading Rubric | BMIS570_B01_202230
1
Computer Science Question
Name
Institution
Course
Date
2
Computer Science Question
Case 1: In Re: Zappos.com, Inc., Customer Data Security Breach Litigation
Case Facts
The security breach of servers belonging to Defendants Amazon.com, Inc., doing
business as Zappos.com, and Zappos.com, Inc. in January 2012 prompted this Multidistrict
Litigation. Zappos is an online store selling clothing, shoes, purses, home furnishings, cosmetics,
and accessories. Plaintiffs are Zappos consumers who provided personal information to the
company to make purchases on Zappos.com or 6PM.com. A computer hacker targeted
Zappos.com in mid-January 2012, attempting to download more than twenty-four million clients'
files containing customer identifying information such as names and addresses from a Zappos
server. Plaintiffs claimed that Zappos notified them via email on January 16, 2012, that their
personal customer account information had been hacked by hackers. Plaintiffs have filed actions
in federal district courts across the country, claiming damages for damages caused by the
Security Breach under state and federal statutes and common law. Zappos filed a motion to
compel arbitration and a stay of the proceedings. The arbitration agreement in question was
found in the Disputes section of the Zappos.com Terms of Service (LexisNexis, 2012).
Issue Raised
In this multidistrict litigation case, the issue being raised was whether there was a valid
agreement to arbitrate ever existed. The Disputes section of the Zappos.com Terms of Service is
where this arbitration agreement is located (LexisNexis, 2012). However, the answer to this issue
is negative since the Court maintained there was no acceptance by the Plaintiffs of the terms of
use.
3
Case Arguments
The first argument, in this case, was through a motion filed to seal exhibit A (#15).
Zappos has requested that Exhibit A to the Additional Plaintiffs' Joinder to Zappos' Motion to
Compel Arbitration and Stay Action be kept secret. Exhibit A comprises customer information,
such as purchase histories and personal details on Zappos consumers. However, this motion was
not opposed by the Plaintiffs. The Ninth Circuit has recognized that when there is a need for
confidentiality, there are exceptions to the presumption of access to judicial records.
Another argument was based on the breach of contract, where the Plaintiffs claimed that
Zappos breached a contract to secure their data. However, the Court dismissed these claims since
there was no implied or direct contract allegation. Customers consented to pay money for goods,
and Zappos' website commented that a secure firewall protected its servers and that customers'
data was safe. The first type of contract for the sale of goods is not alleged to have been
breached. The unilateral statements of fact alleged as to the security of customers' data do not
create any contractual obligations. However, they can be the basis of tort claims for
misrepresentation if they are negligently or intentionally false (CaseText, 2018).
Plaintiffs claimed that the type of data gained in the Zappos breach was used to perpetrate
identity theft, including putting individuals at greater risk of phishing and pharming, methods
hackers use to obtain more personal identifying information. The plaintiffs further claim that
their credit card numbers were within the data taken during the breach. These stolen data allowed
the hackers to perpetrate identity theft or fraud. The plaintiffs alleged they faced financial losses
due to this data breach (CaseText, 2018).
Biblical Integration
4
John 10:10 says, "The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that
they may have life, and have it to the full" (BibleGateway, n.d.). Based on this verse, the
Plaintiffs were correct to be worried when they learned of the breach. Unfortunately, the hackers
stole and used their data for their gains, destroying the plaintiffs' livelihood. Some claimed to
have already suffered financial losses due to their identity being stolen by the hackers.
Conclusion
The Court denied the motion to compel arbitration and stay the Action filed by Zappos.
The denial was based on two grounds: first, the obligation for arbitration is unenforceable;
second, the plaintiffs refused to accept the terms of usage. The Terms of Use link can be found
between the middle and bottom of every Zappos page, visible if a user scrolls down. The link
was the same size, typeface, and color as most insignificant connections. When creating an
account, logging in to an existing account, or completing a transaction, the website did not direct
the user to the Terms of Use. I agree with the court ruling since there is no direct proof that the
Plaintiffs clicked on the terms of usage. Also, the website fails to direct the user to the terms of
usage. The link had no distinctive features that distinguished it from the others, which I believe
made it difficult for the user to figure out where and how to find the terms, suggesting a problem
with the user experience.
Case 2: Verizon v. FCC
Case Facts
The Federal Communications Commission, the defendant, created the Open Internet
Order. At the time, the Internet could be split into four types of users: one, backbone networks
that provided the physical cable network; two, service providers that connected the physical
5
network to consumers; three, edge users who delivered content and applications over the
Internet; four, end-users that saw the content. The Open Internet Order was created to ensure net
neutrality, or the Internet's openness, by prohibiting different forms of discrimination against
users and content. The Open Internet Order stated that Internet service providers must: provide
transparency by disclosing certain network-management practices and terms for their broadband
services, not block lawful content, and not discriminate in unreasonably transmitting lawful
network traffic. Verizon, the plaintiff, in this case, filed a lawsuit claiming that the Open Internet
Order exceeded the FCC's jurisdiction. The FCC was given jurisdiction to implement regulations
about broadband infrastructure development under Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act
of 1996. The FCC maintained that the Open Internet Order guidelines were permissible under
Section 706 because they would promote competition and speed the development of broadband
service. Verizon argued that the laws would aid broadband development, stating that any
advantages to users would be overshadowed by the harm caused by limiting service providers'
incentives. Verizon also contended that the Open Internet Order treated Internet service
providers like common carriers, which was illegal.
Case Issues
The issues raised in this particular case were: One, Is it legal for the Federal
Communications Commission to require state utility commissions to establish the rates charged
by incumbents for leased elements on a forward-looking basis, unrelated to the incumbents'
investment, under the Telecommunications Act of 1996? Secondly, is the Telecommunications
Act of 1996 required incumbents to combine such elements at the request of entrants when
leasing them to the entrants?
Case Arguments
6
The FCC implemented the order, referred to as "Preserving the Open Internet," steered by
three Open Internet Rules. Transparency was required in the first rule, where all broadband
providers must disclose the commercial terms of their internet access services. In the second rule,
fixed broadband providers are barred from obstructing applications, with no harmful devices,
content, or services viewed as lawful. Finally, the issue of discrimination was highlighted in the
third rule, which barred fixed broadband providers from unreasonable discrimination while
transmitting network traffic deemed lawful. However, Verizon moved to Court petitioning these
three rules that FCC adopted in the Open Internet Order. First, Verizon claimed that FCC did not
have the constitutional obligation to propagate the rule under the telecommunications Act of
1996 and the Communications Act of 1934. Second, Verizon argued the rules were arbitrary and
capricious in violation of the law. Third, Verizon argued that Sections 153(51) and 332(c) (2) of
the Communications Act preclude the FCC from regulating broadband providers as common
carriers, in contrast to how the Act regulates conventional telecommunications providers. The
other argument by Verizon was the rules violated Verizon's First Amendment rights. Finally, the
last argument by Verizon was that Verizon's Fifth Amendment rights were violated by the rules,
which constituted an unjustified taking (Harvard Law Review, 2014).
The FCC claimed it had the constitutional obligation to implement the Open Internet
Rules as outlined in the Communications Act Section 1302 (a) and (b). Although section 1302 is
ambiguous, the Court held that this claim by FCC is reasonable and that the authorizing statute
empowered it. Another argument by FCC was that section 1302 was sanctioned after the
Communications Act of 1934. Therefore, it was collated in another Act, and chapter prohibitions
on treating broadband providers as common carriers do not affect the Open Internet Rules under
this Act. However, the Court rejected this argument (Harvard Law Review, 2014).
7
Biblical Integration
Romans 13 verse 1 says, "Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there
is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been
established by God" (biblegateway, n.d.). Consequently, FCC obtained its authority to adopt the
rules in the Open Internet Order from its governing statutes. FCC submits to the statutory
governing Acts.
Conclusion
The Court ruled that the FCC can require state commissions to set the rates charged by
incumbents for leased elements on a forward-looking basis untied to the incumbents' investment.
This shows that the Commission has the power to propagate rules governing broadband
providers' treatment of Internet traffic. I applaud this ruling because under the
Telecommunications Act Section 706, the Commission has the requisite affirmative authority to
implement the rules.
8
References
BibleGateway. (n.d.). John 10:10 NIV - - Bible Gateway. Www.biblegateway.com.
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%2010%3A10&version=NIV
biblegateway. (n.d.). Romans 13 NIV - - Bible Gateway. Www.biblegateway.com.
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%2013&version=NIV
CaseText. (2018, March 8). Stevens v. Zappos.com, Inc. (In re Zappos.com, Inc., Customer Data
Sec. Breach Litig.), No. 16-16860 | Casetext Search + Citator. Casetext.com.
https://casetext.com/case/com-inc-v-zapposcom-inc-in-re-zappos
Harvard Law Review. (2014, June 20). Verizon v. FCC. Harvardlawreview.org.
https://harvardlawreview.org/2014/06/verizon-v-fcc/
LexisNexis. (2012). In re Zappos, Inc. | Case Brief for Law School | LexisNexis. Community.
https://www.lexisnexis.com/community/casebrief/p/casebrief-in-re-zappos-inc
