Romo v. Secretary of Health and Human Services ( 2024 )

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
Filed: October 15, 2024
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
ERIC ROMO, *
*
Petitioner, * No. 23-1825V
*
v. * Special Master Gowen
*
SECRETARY OF HEALTH *
AND HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
Respondent. *
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
Joseph Pepper, Conway Homer, P.C., Boston, MA, for petitioner.
Tyler King, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for respondent.
RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1
On October 17, 2023, Eric Romo (“petitioner”), filed a petition for compensation in the
National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (“the Program”).2 Petitioner alleges that he
suffered from Guillain-Barré Syndrome (“GBS”) as a result of the influenza vaccine
administered to him on November 10, 2020. Amended Petition at Preamble (ECF No. 15).
Specifically, petitioner alleges that he suffered a demyelinating injury, GBS, and chronic
inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (“CIDP”) a result of the flu vaccine. Id.
On October 11, 2024, respondent filed the Rule 4(c) report recommending that
compensation be awarded for petitioner’s GBS following administration of the flu vaccine.3
Respondent (“Resp’t”) Report (“Rept.”) (ECF No. 24). Respondent states that petitioner “has
1
Pursuant to the E-Government Act of 2002, see 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012), because this unpublished opinion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 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.
3
Respondent specifically denies that petitioner had CIDP and that the flu vaccine can cause CIDP. The
recommendation for compensation is based solely upon petitioner’s Table flu/GBS claim. Resp’t Rept., n. 1.
satisfied the criteria set forth in the Vaccine Injury Table (“Table”) and the Qualifications and
Aids to Interpretation (“QAI”) for GBS as a result of the flu vaccine.” Id. at 7; see also 42
C.F.R. § 100.3(a)(XIV)(D), (c)(15). Additionally, petitioner’s medical records do not contain
any evidence of an alternate cause for petitioner’s condition and his records demonstrate that he
has met the severity criteria outlined in §300aa—11(c)(1)(D).
A special master may determine whether a petitioner is entitled to compensation based
upon the record. A hearing is not required 42 U.S.C. § 13; Vaccine Rule 8(d). In light of
respondent’s recommendation and my own review of the record, petitioner has established that
he has suffered a Table GBS, and is entitled to compensation. This matter shall now proceed to
the damages phase.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/ Thomas L. Gowen
Thomas L. Gowen
Special Master
2