Court Opinion

ID: 6321709
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-03-09 22:01:24.063939+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:19:24.751385
License: Public Domain

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
                                 OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
                                         No. 19-1646V
                                        UNPUBLISHED

    ROBERT LABIANCO,                                        Chief Special Master Corcoran

                        Petitioner,                         Filed: February 7, 2022
    v.
                                                            Special Processing Unit (SPU);
    SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND                                 Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;
    HUMAN SERVICES,                                         Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine;
                                                            Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS)
                       Respondent.

Gary Alvin Bryant, Willcox & Savage, P.C., Norfolk, VA, for Petitioner.

Austin Joel Egan, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

                                   RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

       On October 23, 2019, Robert LaBianco 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-Barre Syndrome as a result of
an influenza vaccine received on November 15, 2018. Petition at 1. Petitioner further
alleges that residual effects of his injury continued for more than six months and he has
not received compensation in the form of an award or settlement and has not filed a civil
action for his injuries. Petition at ¶¶ 6, 8. The case was assigned to the Special Processing
Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

       On February 4, 2022, Respondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he concedes
that Petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report at

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  Because this unpublished Ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required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 identify 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 access.
2
 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755. Hereinafter, for ease
of citation, all section references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C.
§ 300aa (2012).
1. Specifically, Respondent agrees that “petitioner has satisfied the criteria set forth in the
Vaccine Injury Table (“Table”) and the Qualifications and Aids to Interpretation (“QAI”).”
Id. at 6.

       In view of Respondent’s position and the evidence of record, I find that
Petitioner is entitled to compensation.

      IT IS SO ORDERED.

                                                          s/Brian H. Corcoran
                                                          Brian H. Corcoran
                                                          Chief Special Master

                                              2