United States Court of Federal Claims, 2019

Meade v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Decided April 10, 2019 · Katherine E. Oler

Opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 17-1633V (Unpublished)

************************* RHONDA MEADE, *

* Filed: March 1, 2019 Petitioner, * Special Master Oler

* v. * Entitlement; Influenza (“Flu”) Vaccine

* Guillain-Barré syndrome (“GBS”). SECRETARY OF HEALTH * AND HUMAN SERVICES, *

* Respondent. *

************************* Jeffrey S. Pop, Jeffrey S. Pop & Associates, Beverly Hills, CA, for Petitioner. Jennifer Leigh Reynaud, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

On October 30, 2017, Rhonda Meade (“Petitioner”) filed a petition seeking compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.2 Petitioner alleges that she developed Guillain-Barré syndrome (“GBS”) as a result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccine that she received on November 5, 2014. See Petition at 1, ECF No. 1.

In his Rule 4(c) Report, filed on February 28, 2019, Respondent recommends that compensation be awarded in this case. Rule 4(c) Report at 1, ECF No. 26. Respondent states that the medical evidence demonstrates Petitioner has “satisfied the criteria set forth in the Vaccine Injury Table (“Table”) and the Qualifications and Aids to Interpretation (“QAI”).” Id. at 4. Accordingly, Respondent concludes that Petitioner is entitled to an award of damages, the scope of which is limited to Petitioner’s GBS and its related sequelae. Id. The type and amount of damages is to be determined through further proceedings.

In light of Respondent’s concession, and based on my own review of the record (see Section 13(a)(1)), I find that Petitioner is entitled to compensation. A separate damages order will issue accordingly.

IT IS SO ORDERED. s/ Katherine E. Oler

Katherine E. Oler Special Master

1 Although this ruling is not formally designated for publication, it will be posted nonetheless on the United States Court of Federal Claims website, in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002, 44 U.S.C. § 3501 (2012). As provided by 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-12(d)(4)(B), however, the parties may object to the ruling’s inclusion of certain kinds of confidential information. Specifically, under Vaccine Rule 18(b), each party has fourteen days within which to request redaction “of any information furnished by that party: (1) that is a trade secret or commercial or financial in substance and is privileged or confidential; or (2) that includes medical files or similar files, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy.” Vaccine Rule 18(b). Otherwise, the whole decision will be available to the public. Id. 2 The Vaccine Program comprises Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3758, codified as amended at 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-10 through 34 (2012) (“Vaccine Act” or “the Act”). Individual section references hereafter will be to § 300aa of the Act (but will omit that statutory prefix).

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.