United States Court of Federal Claims, 2026

Ahmed v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

Ahmed v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Decided July 20, 2026 · Herbrina D S Young
Ahmed v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

Opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS Filed: June 25, 2026

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * MOMEN AHMED, *

* Petitioner, * No. 22-566V

* v. * Special Master Young

* SECRETARY OF HEALTH * AND HUMAN SERVICES, *

* Respondent. *

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Leah VaSahnja Durant, Law Offices of Leah V. Durant, PLLC, Washington, DC, for Petitioner. Irene Angelica Firippis, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

DECISION 1

On May 24, 2022, Momen Ahmed (“Petitioner”) filed a petition for compensation pursuant to the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. 2 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-10 to -34 (2018). Pet., ECF No. 1. Petitioner alleged that he suffered from Guillain-Barré Syndrome (“GBS”) and/or chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (“CIDP”) that was caused-in-fact by “the effects of one or more vaccinations,” including the influenza (“flu”), measles, mumps, rubella (“MMR”), pneumococcal polysaccharide (“PPSV23”), meningococcal, tetanus, diphtheria, and acellular-pertussis (“Tdap”), and the combined hepatitis A and B (“Twinrix”) vaccines he received on March 13, 2020. Am. Pet. at 1, ECF No. 32.

On June 24, 2026, the parties filed a stipulation (attached as Appendix A) in which they state that a decision should be entered awarding compensation to Petitioner. Stipulation ¶ 7, ECF No. 55. Respondent “denies that [P]etitioner sustained a Table GBS injury; denies that the vaccines caused and/or significantly aggravated [P]etitioner’s alleged injuries; and denies that the vaccines caused any other injury or [P]etitioner’s current disabilities.” Id. ¶ 6. Nevertheless, the parties agree to the joint stipulation. See id. ¶ 7. I find the stipulation reasonable and adopt it as the decision of the Court in awarding damages, on the terms set forth therein.

The parties stipulate that Petitioner shall receive the following compensation:

(a) A lump payment of $84,761.25 to be paid through an ACH deposit to Petitioner’s counsel’s IOLTA account for prompt disbursement to Petitioner.

Id. ¶ 8. This amount represents compensation for all damages that would be available under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a).

I approve the requested amount for Petitioner’s compensation. Accordingly, an award should be made consistent with the stipulation.

In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the Clerk of Court SHALL ENTER JUDGMENT in accordance with the terms of the parties’ stipulation. 3

IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Herbrina D.S. Young Herbrina D.S. Young Special Master

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS MOMEN AHMED, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

v. ) No. 22-566V

) Special Master Young SECRETARY OF ) HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, )

)

Respondent. )

) CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that today, June 24, 2026, a copy of the foregoing Stipulation will be served by electronic mail to [email protected], Richard Amada at [email protected], and Leah Durant at [email protected].

/s/ Irene A. Firippis IRENE A. FIRIPPIS Trial Attorney Torts Branch, Civil Division U.S. Department of Justice P.O. Box 146 Benjamin Franklin Station Washington, D.C. 20044-0146 (202) 305-3250 [email protected] Dated: June 24, 2026

1 Because this Decision 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 Decision 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. 3 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment is expedited by the parties’ joint filing of notice renouncing the right to seek review.

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