Mendoza v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 21-1547V UNPUBLISHED

VERONICA MENDOZA,

Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner,

v. Filed: September 2, 2022 SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND Motion for decision; Dismissal; HUMAN SERVICES, Tdap Vaccine; MMR Vaccine;

Varicella vaccine; Guillain-Barré Respondent. syndrome (“GBS”); vaccine received outside United States Laura Levenberg, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA, for Petitioner.

Heather L. Pearlman, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

DECISION1 On July 6, 2021, Veronica Mendoza filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. § 300aa—10 through 34,2 (the “Vaccine Act”). Ms. Mendoza alleged that she developed Guillain-Barré syndrome (“GBS”) after receiving Tdap, MMR, and varicella vaccinations on July 18, 2018. ECF No. 1.

On August 4, 2022, Ms. Mendoza filed a motion for a decision dismissing the petition. For the reasons set forth below, Ms. Mendoza’s motion is GRANTED, and this case is DISMISSED.

In the petition, Ms. Mendoza alleged that she developed GBS after receiving the three vaccinations on July 18, 2018, at Servicios Medicos de la Frontera, a “clinic approved by the U.S. Department of State to treat Mexican citizens prior to their immigrant visa interview in Juarez, Mexico.” ECF No. 1; exhibit 7 ¶ 2 (affidavit). The vaccination document indicated that Petitioner had received the three vaccinations on the date alleged but did not contain any additional identifying information for the vaccinations, such as manufacturer, brand name, lot number, etc. Exhibit 1.

After the initial review of the case, an order issued on December 9, 2021, requiring Petitioner to, inter alia, provide additional evidence concerning the manufacturer of the vaccines because the vaccines were administered outside the United States. Sec. 11(c)(1)(B)(III) (for vaccines received outside the United States, requiring that the “vaccine[s] [were] manufactured by a vaccine manufacturer located in the United States”); ECF No. 8.

Ms. Mendoza received multiple extensions of time to pursue additional medical records.

On August 4, 2022, Ms. Mendoza filed a motion for a decision dismissing the petition stating that she is “unable to obtain proof that the vaccine administered was manufactured in the United States.” ECF No. 17.

To receive compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program for vaccines administered outside the United States, a petitioner must prove that the “vaccine[s] [were] manufactured by a vaccine manufacturer located in the United States.” Sec. 11(c)(1)(B)(III). Ms. Mendoza established that she received the vaccines at issue outside the United States, i.e., in Juarez, Mexico, but has conceded that she cannot establish that the vaccines were manufactured by a vaccine manufacturer located in the United States.

Thus, Petitioner has failed to establish entitlement to compensation in the Vaccine Program. This case is dismissed for insufficient proof. The clerk shall enter judgment accordingly.3 IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Brian H. Corcoran Brian H. Corcoran Chief Special Master

3If Petitioner wishes to bring a civil action, she must file a notice of election rejecting the judgment pursuant to § 21(a) “not later than 90 days after the date of the court’s final judgment.”