Court Opinion

ID: 4562324
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2020-09-02 16:02:44.655348+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:00:57.297359
License: Public Domain

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
                                 OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
                                         No. 19-1088V
                                        UNPUBLISHED

    CHESTER BIRCHEAT,                                       Chief Special Master Corcoran

                        Petitioner,                         Filed: July 30, 2020
    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.

Leah VaSahnja Durant, Law Offices of Leah V. Durant, PLLC, Washington, DC, for
petitioner.

James Vincent Lopez, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

                                   RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1

       On July 29, 2019, Chester Bircheat 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 (“GBS”) as a
result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccination he received on November 8, 2017. Petition at 1.
The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

        On July 29, 2020, 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.
Specifically, Respondent agrees that Petitioner suffered from GBS; that he has satisfied
the criteria set forth in the revised Vaccine Injury Table and the Qualifications and Aids to

1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required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 “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa
(2012).
Interpretation, which affords him a presumption of vaccine causation; and that there is no
more likely alternative diagnosis and no apparent alternative cause. Id. at 7.

       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