{"package_id":"USCOURTS-cofc-1_01-vv-00647","decision_granule_id":"USCOURTS-cofc-1_01-vv-00647-cl6652607","petitioner_identifier":"Destiny Lemire","is_minor":null,"age_at_vaccination":null,"age_unit_raw":null,"vaccine_type":null,"vaccination_date":null,"condition_raw":"developmental delays and autism","condition_category":"ASD_autism","autism_spectrum_adjacent":1,"outcome":"dismissed","award_amount_usd":null,"decision_date":"2004-03-05","extraction_version":"gemini-v2","extracted_at":"2026-04-30T14:29:58.667025+00:00","number_of_concurrent_vaccines":null,"dose_number":null,"time_to_onset_days":null,"theory_of_causation":"The petitioners alleged that their daughter, Destiny Lemire, suffered developmental delays and autism as a result of vaccines received starting at two months of age. The petition was initially dismissed for failure to file within the statute of limitations, as symptoms were found to have manifested in September 1998, while the petition was filed in November 2001. The special master later reinstated the petition under RCFC 60(b) based on a conflicting decision in Setnes v. U.S., finding it inequitable to dismiss the Lemires' claim while the Setnes claim proceeded. The Court of Federal Claims dismissed the Respondent's motion for review of the reinstatement order, holding it was not a final decision and thus not ripe for review. The Court noted that the special master's application of Setnes was questionable, as the Setnes decision distinguished between diagnosis and symptom manifestation for statute of limitations triggers, and the special master's application of April 1999 (diagnosis date) or September 1998 (symptom manifestation date) might still fall outside the 36-month window depending on the precise trigger date. The public decision does not detail the specific vaccines, dates of vaccination, specific symptoms, medical tests, treatments, or expert testimony. The outcome was dismissal of the Respondent's motion for review without prejudice, remanding the case to the Special Master. The decision date was March 5, 2004. Attorneys named were Baskir, Judge.","is_death":0,"date_of_death":null,"petition_filed_date":"2001-11-01","case_summary":"On November 1, 2001, Regina and Shannon Lemire filed a petition for compensation under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Compensation Act of 1986 on behalf of their minor daughter, Destiny Lemire. They alleged that Destiny suffered developmental delays and autism as a result of vaccines she received starting at two months of age. The special master initially dismissed the petition on September 25, 2002, finding that it was filed outside the 36-month statute of limitations. The special master determined that Destiny first manifested symptoms in September 1998, or possibly as early as April 1998, but the petition was not filed until November 2001. Judgment was entered in favor of the Respondent on October 30, 2002, after the period for seeking review expired. The petitioners did not appeal this dismissal. On July 31, 2003, the Lemires sought relief from the judgment under Rule 60(b) of the Rules of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims (RCFC). They based their motion on a conflicting decision in the case of Setnes v. U.S., decided June 13, 2003, which addressed a similar statute of limitations issue. The special master granted this motion, reinstating the petition on September 12, 2003, on equitable grounds, stating that it would be unfair for the Setnes petitioners to proceed while their case was dismissed. The Respondent filed a Motion for Review of this reinstatement order on October 10, 2003. The Court of Federal Claims, in an order dated March 5, 2004, dismissed the Respondent's motion without prejudice. The Court held that the special master's order reinstating the claim was not a final decision, and therefore, the Court lacked jurisdiction to review it at that stage. The Court noted that the Respondent had preserved its right to appeal the special master's decision at the appropriate time, after a final decision on the merits. The case was remanded to the Office of the Special Master. The public decision does not describe the specific vaccines administered, the exact dates of vaccination, the specific symptoms observed, any medical tests performed, or the treatments received. The decision also does not name the petitioner's counsel or the respondent's counsel.","is_minor_inferred":1,"is_pediatric_broad":1,"special_master":null,"petitioner_identifier_original":null,"caption_petitioner_name":null,"petitioner_attorney_name":null,"petitioner_attorney_firm":null,"petitioner_attorney_location":null,"adjudicator_name":null,"caption_people_backfilled_at":null,"attorney_canonical_keys":null,"firm_canonical_key":null,"package_title":"Lemire v. Secretary of the Department of Health & Human Services","canonical_url":"https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_01-vv-00647","plain_text_url":"https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_01-vv-00647.txt","json_url":"https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_01-vv-00647.json","source_documents":[{"granule_id":"USCOURTS-cofc-1_01-vv-00647-cl6652607","title":"Lemire v. Secretary of the Department of Health & Human Services","docket_text":"lead-opinion","date_issued":"2004-03-05","pdf_url":"https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/6769766/lemire-v-secretary-of-the-department-of-health-human-services/","pdf_bytes":null,"triage_decision":"keep","triage_reason":"recovered via CL opinion 6652607 (html_with_citations)","download_status":"ok","registry_pdf_url":"https://vicp-registry.org/pdf/USCOURTS-cofc-1_01-vv-00647/USCOURTS-cofc-1_01-vv-00647-cl6652607"}]}