Ogorodnikova v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 24-803V UNPUBLISHED

YULIA OGORODNIKOVA on behalf of her minor child, L.O., Chief Special Master Corcoran

Petitioner, Filed: June 17, 2026 v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent.

Ramon Rodriguez, III, Siri & Glimstad, LLP, Richmond, VA, for Petitioner. Heather L. Pearlman, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

DECISION1 On May 23, 2024, Yulia Ogorodnikova filed a petition for compensation on behalf of her minor child, L.O., under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. § 300aa—10 through 34,2 (the “Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleged that L.O. developed narcolepsy from a human papillomavirus vaccine L.O. received on May 28, 2021. ECF No. 1.

On June 16, 2026, Petitioner filed a motion for a decision dismissing the petition. ECF No. 59. For the reasons set forth below, Petitioner’s motion is GRANTED, and this case is DISMISSED.

Relevant Procedural History Petitioner did not file any supporting documentation with the petition. Petitioner’s initial counsel noted that he had only been contacted by Petitioner ten days before the petition was filed (with a pending statute of limitations date) and that investigation of the claim had just begun. ECF No. 1 n.1. The PAR Initial Order required Petitioner to file statutorily required medical records and other supporting documentation. ECF No. 6. On August 13, 2024, Petitioner filed some medical records and continued filing records through March 6, 2026.

Before a Statement of Completion was filed and the initial review of the case was conducted, on June 16, 2026, Petitioner filed a motion for a decision dismissing the petition “on terms that the Special Master or the Court considers proper.” ECF No. 59 at 1. Petitioner understands that dismissal of the petition would result in a judgment against L.O. and end all L.O.’s rights in the Vaccine Program. Id.

Grounds for Dismissal To receive compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, a petitioner must prove either 1) that the vaccinee suffered an “on-Table” injury – i.e., an injury falling within the Vaccine Injury Table – corresponding to one of the listed vaccines within the applicable time frames, or 2) that the vaccinee suffered an injury not listed the Table or outside the applicable time frames, an “off-Table” injury, that was actually caused by a listed vaccine. See §§ 300aa—13(a)(1)(A) and 11(c)(1). Petitioner alleged an off-Table injury, i.e., that L.O.’s narcolepsy was actually caused by the human papillomavirus vaccination.

Under the Vaccine Act, a petitioner may not receive compensation based solely on the petitioner’s claims alone. Rather, the petition must be supported by either medical records or by the opinion of a competent physician. § 300aa—13(a)(1). For an off-Table injury, a petitioner must also satisfy all three of the elements established by the Federal Circuit in Althen v. Sec’y of Health & Hum. Servs., 418 F.3d 1274, 1278 (2005): “(1) a medical theory causally connecting the vaccination and the injury; (2) a logical sequence of cause and effect showing that the vaccination was the reason for the injury; and (3) a showing of proximate temporal relationship between vaccination and injury.”

Petitioner has not submitted any evidence to establish the Althen prongs, such as an expert report proposing a medical theory. Moreover, Petitioner does not wish to continue pursuing this vaccine claim.

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