# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 18

- 1634 V

UNPUBLISHED

W.B.

,

Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent. Chief Special Master Corcoran

Filed: November 25, 2019

Special Processing Unit (SPU) ;
Rul ing on Entitlement; Concession;
Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine ; Guillain

- Barre Syndrome (GBS)

Ronald Craig Homer, Conway, Homer, P.C. , Boston, MA , for petitioner.

Adriana Ruth Teitel

, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1

On October 23, 2018

, W.B. filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa

- 10, et seq

. , 2 (the “Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleges that he suffered Guillain

- Barré Syndrome (GBS) as a result of receiving an influenza vaccination, on September 12, 2016 . Petit ion at 1

. Petitioner further alleges that he received the vaccination in the United States, that he suffered the

residual effects of his GBS fo r more than six months, and that neither he nor any other party has filed a civil action or received compensation for his GBS. Id. at 13

- 14. The

case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in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 iden tify 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 a ccess.

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99

- 660, 100 Stat. 3755

. Hereinafter, for ease of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subpara graph of 42 U.S.C.
§ 300aa (2012 ).2

On November 22, 2019

, R espondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he

concedes that P etitioner is entitled to compensa tion in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report (ECF No. 30) at 1. Specifically, R espondent found that based on the

medical records: P etitioner has satisfied the criteria set forth in the revised Vaccine Injury Table and the Qualifications and Aids to Interpretation ; onset of GBS occurred between three and forty

- two days after receipt of the se asonal flu vaccination with no there is no apparent alternative cause ; and, the medical records demonstrate that

P etitioner has experienced the residual effects of his GBS for more than six months. Id

. at 5, (citing 42 C.F.R. § 100.3(a)(XIV)(D), (c)(15) )

. Respondent determined, “ based on
the case record as it now stands, [P] etitioner has satisfied all legal prerequisites for compensation under the Act. ” Id.

, (citing 42 U.S.C. § 300aa

- 13(a)(1)(B); 42 U.S.C. § 300aa

- 11(c)(1)(D)(I) ).

In view of R espondent’s position and the evidence of record, I find that

P etitioner is entitle d to compensation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Brian H. Corcoran

Brian H. Corcoran

Chief Special Master