member received MENQUADFI on 31MAR2023 and received another dose of MENQUADFI on 28JUL2023 with no reported adverse event; Initial information received on 10-Aug-2023 regarding an unsolicited valid non-serious case received from a consumer/non-hcp.  This case involves a 17 years old female patient who received meningococcal A-C-Y-W135 (T CONJ) vaccine [Menquadfi] and meningococcal vaccine B RFHBP/NADA/NHBA OMV [Bexesro] on 31-Mar-2023 and received another dose of menquadfi on 28-Jul-2023 with no reported adverse event.  The patient's past medical history, medical treatment(s), vaccination(s) and family history were not provided.   On 31-Mar-2023, the patient received an unknown dose of suspect bexesro not produced by Sanofi Pasteur (formulation; strength; lot number; expiry date not reported) via unknown route in unknown administration site for prophylactic vaccination (Immunization).  On 31-Mar-2023 the patient received a dose 1 of meningococcal A-C-Y-W135 (T CONJ) vaccine (Solution for injection) (unknown batch number; expiry date) via unknown route in unknown administration site for prophylactic vaccination (Immunization). On 28-Jul-2023, the patient received a dose of 0.5 ml (dose 2) of same vaccine (lot number; batch number; expiry date not reported) via unknown route in unknown administration site for Immunization. Information regarding batch number will be requested in the case.  On 28-Jul-2023 the patient received second dose of menquadfi  and had received the first dose on 31-Mar-2023 with no reported adverse event (inappropriate schedule of product administration) (latency: same day).  It was reported, "The caller was not aware of any adverse reactions, treatment, DR or ER visit necessary post administration. The member paid for the 2nd administration of menquadfi out of pocket, totaling over 200. Caller has consulted disease control guidelines and read that this vaccine was only to be administered once a year. The caller would like to confirm the schedule of administration for menquadfi. The caller contacted the pharmacy about the schedule/administration of the second dose. The pharmacist confirmed that the member was given a second dose of menquadfi per school requirements. Caller stated that they found guidelines that students should receive a dose of menquadfi and that it should be administered 3 years apart. Father reached out to redacted for a reimbursement. However, the reimbursement was denied since the member had already received it on 31-Mar-2023. The caller stated that redacted is affiliated with the pharmacy and they want to advise the pharmacy on the correct scheduling guidance. Is there a restricted use of menquadfi? The caller would like to make sure they are following correct protocols and guidelines. The caller noted that the member's school was being persistent. If the member did not receive the additional dose of menquadfi, the member was not going to get a room."   Action taken was not applicable.  At time of reporting, the outcome was Unknown for the event.  This suspected adverse reaction report is submitted and classified as a medication error solely and exclusively to ensure the marketing authorization holder's compliance with the requirements set out in the guidelines. The classification as a medical error is in no way intended, nor should it be interpreted or construed as an allegation or claim made by the marketing authorization holder that any third party has contributed to or is to be held liable for the occurrence of this medication error.   Additional information was received on 15-Aug-2023. Event was added. Case validity was upgraded to valid case. Dosage regimen of menquadfi was added. Clinical course updated and text amended accordingly.