1



# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

(Filed: October 21, 2015 )

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * UNPUBLISHED

SAMUEL GRAY

, *

* No. 13

- 880 V

Petitioner, *

*

v. * Special Master R oth

*

SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Influenza Vaccine; Table Injury;

AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Dyspnea; Neurological Symptoms;

* Insufficient Proof

Respondent. *

*

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

V erne E. Paradie, Jr. , Maglio, Paradie Sherman Walker and Worden

, Lewiston, ME for

petitioner.

G ordon E. Shemin , U.S. Dept. of Justice, Washington, DC for respondent.

DECISION 1

R oth

, Special Master:

On N ovember 5, 2013

, petitioner filed a p etition for Vaccine Compensation in the

National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program [“the Program”], 2 alleging that the influenza

vaccine he received on October 21, 2010 c aused him to suffer from Dyspnea and other

neurological symptoms. The information in the record, however, does not s upport entitlement to

an award under the Program. On January 24, 2014 , petitioner moved for a decision dismissing

this petition.

To receive compensatio n 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 petitioner suffered an injury that was actually caused by a vaccine.

1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I intend to post this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 as amended at 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2006)). In

accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), petitioner hav e 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, co dified as amended, 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.2

See §§ 13(a)(1)(A) and 11(c)(1). An examination of the record did not uncover any evidence

that p etitioner suffered a “Table Injury.” Further, the record does not con tain persuasive

evidence indicating that p etitioner ’ 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 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 reco rd in this case that petitioner has failed to

demonstrate either that h e suffered a “Table In jury” or that petitioner ’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/ M indy Michaels Roth

Mindy Michaels Roth

Special Master