United States Court of Federal Claims, 2026

Tant v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Decided January 16, 2026 · Thomas L. Gowen

Opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

Filed: December 16, 2025 * * * * * * * * * * *

* *

BRITTANY TANT *

* Petitioner, * No. 24-1255V *

v. * Special Master Gowen

SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Order Concluding Proceedings AND HUMAN SERVICES, *

Respondent. *

* * * * * * * * * * * * * Jeffrey S. Pop, Jeffrey S. Pop & Associates, Beverly Hills, CA, for petitioner. Crystal Fialkowski, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for respondent

ORDER CONCLUDING PROCEEDINGS1

On August 15, 2024, Brittany Tant (“petitioner”) filed a claim in the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.2 Petition (ECF No. 1). Petitioner alleged that as a result of receiving the influenza (“flu”) vaccine, she developed cerebellar ataxia. Id. at Preamble.

On December 15, 2025, the parties filed a joint stipulation of dismissal stating, “The parties hereby stipulate pursuant to Vaccine Rule 21(a) that this action shall be dismissed. Joint Stipulation ¶ 2 (ECF No. 25).

Under Vaccine Rule 21(a), petitioner may engage in a voluntary dismissal by filing a stipulation of dismissal which all parties have signed, which the parties in this matter have done. Unver Vaccine Rule 21(a)(3), the result of a joint stipulation of dismissal is an Order Concluding Proceedings. No judgment will enter pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11 for the purposes of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-21(a).

Thus, this case is DISMISSED. The Clerk of the Court is directed to remove this case from the docket of the undersigned.

IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Thomas L. Gowen Thomas L. Gowen Special Master

1 Pursuant to the E-Government Act of 2002, see 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012), because this opinion contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I intend to post it on the website of the United States Court of Federal Claims. The Court’s website is at http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/aggregator/sources/7. Before the opinion is posted on the Court’s website, each party has 14 days to file a motion requesting 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). An objecting party must provide the Court with a proposed redacted version of the opinion. Id. If neither party files a motion for redaction within 14 days, the opinion will be posted on the Court’s website without any changes. Id. 2 The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program is set forth in Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755, codified as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-10 to 34 (2012) (hereinafter “Vaccine Act” or “the Act”). Hereinafter, individual section references will be to 42 U.S.C. § 300aa of the Act.

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