1 

# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 14 -1096V (Filed: September 21, 2016)

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * MILFORD B. REIMAN, *

* Dismissal; Influenza (“Flu”) Vaccine; Petitioner, * Parsonage- Turner Syndrome; * Brachial Plexopathy

v. *

*

SECRETARY OF HEALTH *

AND HUMAN SERVICES, *

* Respondent. *

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

Howard S. Gold, Gold Law Firm, LLC, Wellesley Hills, MA, for petitioner. Linda Renzi, U.S. Dept. of Justice, Washington, DC for respondent.

DECISION 1

Roth, Special Master:

On November 10, 2014, petitioner filed a p etition for Vaccine Compensation in the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program [“the Program”], 2 alleging that an influenza vaccination caused him to develop brachial plexopathy and Parsonage-Turner Syndrome. The
infor mation in the record, however, does not show entitlement to an award under the Program.

1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I intend to post this decision on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-347, § 205, 116 Stat. 2899, 2913 (codified

a s amended at 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2006)). In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), petitioner have 14 days to identify and move to delete medical or other information, that satisfies the criteria in § 300aa-12(d)(4)(B). Further, consistent with the rule requirement, a motion for redaction must include a proposed redacted decision. If, upon review, I agree that the identified material fits within the requirements of that provision, I will delete such material from public

access.

2 The Program comprises Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755, codified as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-10 et seq. (hereinafter “Vaccine Act” or “the Act”). Hereafter, individual section r eferences will be to 42 U.S.C. §
300aa of the Act.2

On September 20, 2016 petitioner filed a “ Motion to Voluntarily Dismiss ” seeking a decision dismissing his petition. ECF No. 34.

To receive compensation under the Program, petitioner must prove either 1) that he suffered a “Table Injury” – i.e., an injury falling within the Vaccine Injury Table

– corresponding to his vaccination, or 2) that he suffered an injury that was actually caused by a vaccine. See §§ 13(a)(1)(A) and 11(c)(1). An examination of the record did not uncover any evidence that petitioner suffered a “Table Injury.” Further, the record does not contain persuasive evidence indicating that petitioner’s alleged injury was vaccine-caused or in any way vaccine-related.

Under the Act, petitioner may not be given a Program award based solely on the petitioner’s claims alone. Rather, the petition must be supported by either medical records or by the opinion of a competent physician. § 13(a)(1). In this case, because there are insufficient medical records supporting pe titioner’s claim, a medical opinion must be offered in support. Petitioner, however, has offered no such opinion that supports a finding of entitlement.

Accordingly, it is clear from the record in this case that petitioner has failed to
demonstrate either that he suffered a “Table Injury” or that his injuries were “actually caused” by

a vaccination. Thus, this case is dismissed for insufficient proof. The Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Mindy Michaels Roth Mindy Michaels Roth Special Master