In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 19-977V 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

AMY PHILLIPS-BELL, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES, 

Respondent. 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

Special Master Katherine E. Oler 

Filed: December 2, 2020 

Involuntary Dismissal; Failure to 

Prosecute; Rule 21(b). 

Amy Phillips-Bell, pro se, St. Louis, MO, for Petitioner. 

Ida Nassar, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. 

DECISION DISMISSING CASE FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE1

I. Procedural History

On July 8, 2019, Amy Phillips-Bell (“Petitioner”) filed a petition for compensation in the 

National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (the “Vaccine Program”)2 alleging that the 

influenza vaccine she received on August 1, 2016 caused her to develop transverse myelitis. Pet. 

at 1, ECF No. 1. On July 9, 2019, an initial order was issued in this case. ECF No. 6. I instructed 

Petitioner to re-file her motion to proceed in forma pauperis and to file all relevant medical records 

1

 Although this Decision has been formally designated “not to be published,” it will nevertheless be posted 

on the Court of Federal Claims’ website in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002, 44 U.S.C. § 

3501 (2012). This means the ruling will be available to anyone with access to the internet. As provided 

by 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-12(d)(4)(B), however, the parties may object to the decision’s inclusion of certain 

kinds of confidential information. Specifically, under Vaccine Rule 18(b), each party has fourteen days 

within which to request 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). Otherwise, the Decision in its present form will be available. Id.

2

 The Vaccine Program comprises Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. 

No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3758, codified as amended at 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-10 through 34 (2012) (“Vaccine 

Act” or “the Act”). Individual section references hereafter will be to § 300aa of the Act (but will omit that 

statutory prefix). 

REISSUED FOR PUBLICATION

MAR 8 2021

OSM

U.S. COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS
2 

and documents related to her claim, along with a status report addressing her efforts to secure 

counsel. Id. Petitioner subsequently re-filed her motion to proceed in forma pauperis on August 

8, 2019. ECF No. 8. 

I held a status conference in this case on October 15, 2019. ECF No. 14. After the status 

conference, I ordered Petitioner to file her outstanding medical records and a statement of 

completion by March 2, 2020. I granted her motion to proceed in forma pauperis. See Order dated 

October 16, 2019. 

On March 5, 2020, my law clerk contacted Petitioner via email to inform her that her 

medical records were overdue and needed to be filed. See Informal Remark of April 1, 2020. On 

April 1, 2020, I ordered Petitioner to file her outstanding medical records, or otherwise contact 

chambers to schedule a status conference by April 30, 2020. See Scheduling Order dated April 1, 

2020; ECF No. 20. Petitioner did not comply with this order. 

On May 21, 2020, Petitioner contacted chambers to notify the Court that she wished to 

“withdraw” her Petition. See Informal Remark of June 2, 2020, see also ECF No. 21. This email, 

the full text of which is contained within my June 24, 2020 scheduling order, did not properly 

effectuate dismissal of the Petition. 

Accordingly, on June 24, 2020, I ordered Petitioner to file a motion to dismiss, or a status 

report indicating how she would like to proceed by August 24, 2020. See Scheduling Order dated 

June 24, 2020; ECF No. 21. This order included examples of a notice of voluntary dismissal, as 

well as a motion for a dismissal decision. See Id., Attachments A, B. Petitioner did not respond 

to this order. 

On October 2, 2020, the June 24, 2020 Order was re-mailed to Petitioner. On the same 

day, I issued an order instructing Petitioner to either file her motion to dismiss, or a status report 

indicating how she would like to proceed by November 2, 2020. See Scheduling Order dated 

October 2, 2020; ECF No. 22. I informed Petitioner that a failure to do so would be interpreted as 

a failure to prosecute and her case would be dismissed. 

II. Conclusion 

Vaccine Rule 21(b)(1) provides that a “special master or the court may dismiss a petition 

or any claim therein for failure of the petitioner to prosecute or comply with these rules or any 

order of the special master or the court.” Since May 21, 2020, Petitioner has not communicated 

with Respondent or my chambers regarding this petition. Petitioner was given ample opportunity 

to do so. Further, I have repeatedly ordered Petitioner to file her motion to dismiss, or a status 

report indicating how she would like to proceed. Her failure to comply with my orders along with 

her communication with my chambers that she would like to withdraw her petition indicate that 

she is not interested in prosecuting her claim. 

As such, IT IS ORDERED THAT, 

 The petition is hereby DISMISSED for failure of the petitioner to prosecute. 
3 

A copy of this Decision shall be sent to Petitioner by regular first-class mail at the following 

address: 

Amy Phillips-Bell 

2816 Wyoming Street 

St. Louis, MO, 63118 

Any questions regarding this Decision may be directed to my law clerk, Neil Bhargava, by 

telephone at 202-357-6351, or by email at neil_bhargava@cfc.uscourts.gov. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

 __________________ 

 Katherine E. Oler 

 Special Master