Court Opinion

ID: 4582889
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2020-11-02 18:01:47.245037+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:47:19.403880
License: Public Domain

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
                                 OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
                                         No. 19-1098V
                                        UNPUBLISHED

    RICHARD P. JOHNSON,                                     Chief Special Master Corcoran

                        Petitioner,                         Filed: October 2, 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.

Donald L. Schlapprizzi, St. Louis, MO, for petitioner.

Christine Mary Becer, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

                                   RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

      On July 30, 2019, Richard P. Johnson 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
defined on the Vaccine Injury Table after receiving an influenza vaccine on August 21,
2016. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office
of Special Masters.

        On September 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 “concluded that [P]etitioner suffered GBS following
a flu vaccine within the Table time period.” Id. at 4. Respondent further agrees that “based

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  Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required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).
on the record as it now stands, compensation is appropriate, as [P]etitioner has satisfied
all legal prerequisites for compensation under the Act.” Id.

       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