United States Court of Federal Claims, 2020

Johnson v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Decided December 14, 2020 · Brian H. Corcoran

Opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 19-1422V

UNPUBLISHED

DARLA JOHNSON, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: November 6, 2020 v.

Special Processing Unit (SPU); SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND Ruling on Entitlement; Concession; HUMAN SERVICES, Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine; Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS) Respondent.

Nancy Routh Meyers, Turning Point Litigation, Greensboro, NC, for Petitioner.

Ida Nassar, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

On September 17, 2019, Darla Johnson filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq.2 (the “Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleges that she suffered Guillain-Barré Syndrome (“GBS”) as a result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccine administered to her on September 23, 2016. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On November 6, 2020, Respondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he concedes that Petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report at 1. Specifically, Respondent states that Petitioner “suffered from GBS, and that she has satisfied the criteria set forth in the revised Vaccine Injury Table (Table) and the Qualifications and Aids to Interpretation (‘QAI’), which afford her a presumption of vaccine causation if the onset of GBS occurs between three and forty-two days after a seasonal flu vaccination and there is no more likely alternative diagnosis and no apparent alternative cause.” Id. at 10.

In view of Respondent’s position and the evidence of record, I find that Petitioner is entitled to compensation.

IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Brian H. Corcoran

Brian H. Corcoran

Chief Special Master

1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of Electronic Government Services). This means the ruling will be available to anyone with access to the internet. In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), Petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to redact medical or other information, the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, I agree that the identified material fits within this definition, I will redact such material from public access. 2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755. Hereinafter, for ease of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa (2012).

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