Spain v. Secretary of Health and Human Services ( 2020 )


Menu:
  •             In the United States Court of Federal Claims
    OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
    Filed: February 7, 2020
    * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
    KATHLEEN SPAIN,                     *               UNPUBLISHED
    *
    Petitioner,             *               No. 18-737V
    v.                                  *
    *               Special Master Dorsey
    SECRETARY OF HEALTH                 *
    AND HUMAN SERVICES,                 *               Petitioner’s Motion for Decision Denying
    *               Compensation; Diphtheria-Tetanus-acellular
    Respondent.             *               Pertussis (“DTaP”) Vaccine; Optic Neuritis
    *               (“ON”).
    * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
    Diana L. Stadelnikas, Maglio Christopher and Toale, PA, Sarasota, FL, for petitioner.
    Glenn MacLeod, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
    DECISION1
    On May 24, 2018, Kathleen Spain (“petitioner”) filed a petition for compensation under
    the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (“the Program”)2 alleging that she received
    a Diphtheria-Tetanus-acellular Pertussis (“DTaP”) vaccination on May 15, 2017, and thereafter
    developed optic neuritis (“ON”). Petition at 1-2. The information in the record, however, does
    not show entitlement to an award under the Program.
    On February 7, 2020, petitioner moved for a decision denying compensation, stating that
    “[p]etitioner has filed all evidence Petitioner believes is relevant to this matter and does not
    intend to file further evidence in support of Petitioner’s case,” and thus petitioner “waives the
    1
    Because this Decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the
    undersigned is required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims’ website in
    accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (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, the undersigned
    agrees that the identified material fits within this definition, the undersigned will redact such
    material from public access.
    2
    The Program comprises Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, 42
    U.S.C. §§ 300aa-10 et seq. (hereinafter “Vaccine Act” or “the Act”). Hereafter, individual
    section references will be to 42 U.S.C. § 300aa of the Act.
    1
    right to any hearing or further proceedings in this matter” and “moves for a decision denying
    compensation.” Petitioner’s Motion for Decision Denying Compensation at ¶¶ 1-3. Petitioner
    states that she understands that a decision by the Special Master will result in a judgment against
    her, and that she has been advised that such a judgment will end all of her rights under the
    Vaccine Act. 
    Id. at ¶
    4. Petitioner states that she intends to protect her right to file a civil action.
    
    Id. at ¶
    6.
    To receive compensation under the Program, petitioner must prove either (1) that she
    suffered a “Table Injury”—i.e., an injury falling within the Vaccine Injury Table—corresponding
    to the vaccination, or (2) that she suffered an injury that was actually caused by the vaccination.
    See §§ 13(a)(1)(A) and 11(c)(1). The records submitted by petitioner show that she does not
    meet the statutory requirement under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-11(c)(1)(D)(i) to establish entitlement to
    compensation. The Federal Circuit has explained that the eligibility requirements in Section
    11(c) are not mere pleading requirements or matters of proof at trial, but instead are “threshold
    criteri[a] for seeking entry into the compensation program.” Black v. Sec’y of Health & Human
    Servs., 
    93 F.3d 781
    , 785-87 (Fed. Cir. 1996).
    Accordingly, in light of petitioner’s motion and a review of the record, the undersigned
    finds that petitioner is not entitled to compensation. Thus, this case is dismissed. The Clerk
    shall enter judgment accordingly.
    IT IS SO ORDERED.
    s/Nora Beth Dorsey
    Nora Beth Dorsey
    Special Master
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 18-737

Judges: Nora Beth Dorsey

Filed Date: 3/3/2020

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 3/3/2020