Specifically, it had refused to hire a woman as a memo clerk because it regarded her as having carpal tunnel syndrome.

Also last month, the EEOC filed a class-action complaint against Founders Pavilion Inc. of Corning, N.Y.

In this complaint, which marks the first class-action under GINA, the EEOC alleged that the nursing home and rehabilitation center violated the law by asking prospective and current employees for their family medical histories in the course of pre-employment exams, annual medical exams, and return-to-work exams following medical leaves.

In addition, the EEOC alleged Founders discriminated against employees because of disabilities or perceived disabilities as well as because of pregnancy.

"This does look to me like it's the beginning of an aggressive enforcement," said Paula Barran, a leading national employment law attorney with the Portland, Ore.-based Barran Liebman. "We have the Fabricut case settlement. And now the (Founder's) lawsuit is large and significant, and it's intended to be because they filed it as a class-action. 

"The EEOC has a lot of flexibility in how they can challenge things. To move forward with class litigation to me illustrates they're trying to make a statement about compliance with this law."

Related: Click here for an EEOC Q&A on GINA.

Indeed, the EEOC approved its Strategic Enforcement Plan for fiscal years 2012-16 last December. In the plan, the EEOC identified six national priorities, including addressing emerging issues. GINA is viewed by the EEOC as an emerging issue.

Peggy Mastroianni, the associate legal counsel for the EEOC responsible for developing commission guidance and supervision under GINA, said the time lag between the date GINA took effect (November 2009) and the filing of its first lawsuit was more a function of administrative process.

"It takes a while for people to become more familiar with the law. It takes a while for any complaints to reach the stage that we feel the time is right to file a lawsuit," Mastroianni said.

To date, the number of GINA-related complaints the EEOC has received has totaled only about 1,000, but they are increasing each year.

Although GINA has been law for a few years now, many employers still do not understand that requesting family medical history, even through a contract medical examiner, violates this law.

The law also bans group health plans from the common practice of rewarding workers, often with lower premiums or one-time payments, if they give their family medical histories when completing health risk questionnaires.

Mastroianni said many of the GINA allegations that the EEOC has thus far investigated originated with a violation of the ADA. The EEOC then learned during its examinations that people were asked questions that violated GINA.

"I think the Angelina Jolie example is really good because this law was enacted to address people's fears that if they took these kinds of tests, employers and insurers would use them against them," Mastroianni said. "Say a woman who works for a company decides to get the BRCA test. That information is good for her to have. Good for her family to have. But that is information an employer can't ask about. Secondly, if an employer happened to look at this person's Facebook page, or a Facebook page, and they discussed information related to these genetic tests, the employer could never use that information.

"That prohibition is an absolute one. It is totally prohibited (under GINA) and that's because what might happen to you (someday medically) is never relevant to your present-day ability to do a job."

Barran said these recent cases illustrate the EEOC is taking a hard-line position on medical examinations that include requests for genetic information. She cautioned employers requiring these exams at any stage in the hiring or employment process to ensure they direct medical providers not to ask applicants and employees about their family medical histories.

In addition, she said employers should instruct providers to exclude from reports sent to the employer any information about an applicant or employee's family medical history that the provider inadvertently learns.

"It's not just about prohibitions on discrimination based on genetic information. We are talking very stringent restrictions that govern the collection of information," Barran said. "That's really where employers need to make sure they are in compliance with GINA."