In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 09-221V

Filed: January 9, 2014

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

DIKSHA BATISH, * 

 * Special Master

* Hamilton-Fieldman

*

Petitioner, * Petitioner’s Motion for Ruling on the 

v. * Record; Insufficient Proof of Causation; 

* Vaccine Act Entitlement; Denial Without 

SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Hearing.

AND HUMAN SERVICES, *

*

Respondent. *

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

Thomas Gallagher, Somers Point, NJ, for Petitioner.

Alexis Babcock, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

DECISION1

On April 14, 2009, Meena Sharma and Sat Dev Batish (“Petitioners”) filed a petition on 

behalf of their daughter Diksha Batish for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury 

Compensation Program (“the Program”), 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq. (2006), 2alleging that

their daughter suffered from acute myopathy as a result of receiving the Tetanus booster and 

 

1

The undersigned intends to post this unpublished decision on the United States Court of 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 as amended at 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2006)). As 

provided by Vaccine Rule 18(b), each party has 14 days within which to file a motion for 

redaction “of any information furnished by that party (1) that is trade secret or commercial or 

financial information and is privileged or confidential, or (2) that are medical files and similar 

files the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy.” 

Vaccine Rule 18(b). In the absence of such motion, the entire decision will be available to the 

public. Id. 

2

The National Vaccine Injury Compensation 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. (2006). Hereinafter, individual section references will be to 42 

U.S.C. § 300aa of the Vaccine Act.
Menactra (Meningitis) vaccinations on April 14, 2006. Petition (“Pet.”) at 1, ECF No. 1.

3

 

During the pendency of this case, Diksha Batish reached the age of majority and as such the case 

was re-captioned listing her as the sole Petitioner. Motion, ECF No. 76; Order, ECF No. 77. 

The information in the record does not show entitlement to an award under the Program.

On January 9, 2014, Petitioner moved for a decision dismissing her petition, 

acknowledging that insufficient evidence exists to demonstrate entitlement to compensation.

To receive compensation under the Program, Petitioner must prove either 1) that Diksha 

suffered a “Table Injury”-i.e., an injury falling within the Vaccine Injury Table- corresponding to 

one of Diksha’s vaccinations, or 2) that Diksha 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 Diksha suffered a “Table Injury.” Further, the record does not contain a medical 

expert’s opinion or any other persuasive evidence indicating that Diksha’s alleged injury was 

vaccine-caused.

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 Petitioner’s claim, a medical opinion must be offered in support. 

Petitioner, however, has offered no such opinion.

Accordingly, it is clear from the record in this case that Petitioner has failed to 

demonstrate either that Diksha suffered a “Table Injury” or that Diksha’s 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/ Lisa D. Hamilton-Fieldman 

Lisa D. Hamilton-Fieldman

Special Master

 

3

The Petition reflects that Petitioner received a Tetanus booster and Menactra 

vaccination on April 14, 2006; however, Petitioner’s records from Dr. Gargi Gandhi reflect an 

administration of “Adacel and Menactra” on April 14, 2006. See Pet’r’s Ex. 1 at 15-16. Adacel 

is an active booster immunization for the prevention of tetanus, diphtheria, and pertussis.