Miller v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 21-2295V

FRANCIS MILLER, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: December 4, 2023 v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent.

Joseph Alexander Vuckovich, Maglio Christopher & Toale, PA, Washington, DC, for Petitioner.

Adam Nemeth Muffett, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1 On December 14, 2021, Francis Miller 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 he suffered from Guillain-Barre Syndrome (“GBS”) following an influenza vaccination he received on October 22, 2019. Petition at ¶¶ 1, 8, 10. Petitioner further alleges that his vaccine-related symptoms have persisted longer than six months. Petition at ¶ 11. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On December 1, 2023, Respondent filed his Rule 4(c) Report and Proffer on Damages (“Rule 4/Proffer”) in which he concedes that Petitioner is entitled to Because this Ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action taken in this case, it must be made publicly accessible and will be posted on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, and/or at https://www.govinfo.gov/app/collection/uscourts/national/cofc, in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2018) (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 section references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa (2018). compensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c)/Proffer at 1. Specifically, Respondent states that “Petitioner has satisfied the criteria set forth in the Vaccine Injury Table (“Table”) and the Qualifications and Aids to Interpretation (“QAI”).” Id. at 6.

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