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


Menu:
  •     In the United States Court of Federal Claims
    OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
    No. 18-232V
    UNPUBLISHED
    VICTORIA LEMING and KEVIN                               Chief Special Master Corcoran
    LEMING, Parents and Natural
    Guardians of A.L., a Minor,                             Filed: November 4, 2020
    Petitioner,                         Special Processing Unit (SPU);
    v.                                                      Ruling on Entitlement; Table Injury;
    Diphtheria-tetanus-acellular pertussis
    SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND                                 (DTaP) Vaccine; Measles-mumps-
    HUMAN SERVICES,                                         rubella-varicella (MMRV) Vaccine;
    Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib)
    Respondent.                          vaccine Thrombocytopenic Purpura
    (ITP)
    Robert Joel Krakow, Law Office of Robert J. Krakow, P.C. New York, NY, for Petitioner.
    Julia Marter Collison, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1
    On February 14, 2018, Victoria and Kevin Leming filed a petition for compensation
    under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq. 2
    (the “Vaccine Act”) on behalf of their minor child, A.L. Petitioners alleges that a measles-
    mumps-rubella-varicella (“MMRV”), a diphtheria-tetanus-acellular pertussis (“DTaP”),
    and/or a Haemophilus influenzae type b (“Hib”) vaccine that A.L. received on September
    6, 2016, caused her to suffer from immune thrombocytopenic purpura (“ITP”), immune
    1
    Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required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 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 (2012).
    dysfunction, and immunodeficiency. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special
    Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.
    On July 12, 2019, Special Master Dorsey issued a Ruling on Facts finding that
    Petitioners successfully “established A.L.’s alleged injury meets the severity requirement
    described in §300aa-11(c)(1)(D) of the Vaccine Act.” ECF No. 41 at 9. In reaction, on
    November 2, 2020, Respondent filed an Amended Rule 4(c) Report indicating that while
    preserving his right to appeal the July 12, 2019 Ruling, he agrees Petitioners have
    “otherwise satisfied the legal prerequisites for compensation under the Vaccine Act.”
    Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report at 2 (citing 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-11(c)(1)(D), 300aa-
    13(a)(1)).
    Specifically, Respondent stated as follows:
    In light of the Special Master’s fact ruling and medical record evidence
    submitted in this case, [the Secretary] has concluded that petitioners’
    daughter, A.L., suffered an episode of ITP related to her September 6, 2016
    MMRV vaccination. In addition, A.L. suffered the residual effects of her
    condition for more than six months. 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-11(c)(1)(D)(i).
    Therefore, based on the record as it now stands, respondent does not
    dispute that petitioner has satisfied all legal prerequisites for compensation
    under the Act. See 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-13.
    Id. at 4.
    In view of Respondent’s position and the evidence of record, I find that
    Petitioner is entitled to compensation. A Damages Order will issue.
    IT IS SO ORDERED.
    s/Brian H. Corcoran
    Brian H. Corcoran
    Chief Special Master
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 18-232

Judges: Brian H. Corcoran

Filed Date: 12/4/2020

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 12/4/2020