VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_12-vv-00741
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_12-vv-00741
Petitioner: Joyce Weremblewski
Filed: 2014-08-21
Decided: 
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 2009-10-09
Condition: Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS)
Outcome: denied
Award amount USD: 

AI-assisted case summary:
Joyce Weremblweski filed a petition for vaccine compensation on August 21, 2014, alleging she suffered Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) as a result of receiving an influenza vaccine on October 9, 2009. The petition was initially filed on November 1, 2012, but the vaccination date was later corrected. Petitioner's counsel was John Robert Howie, Jr. of Howie Law, P.C. Respondent's counsel was Gordon Shemin of the United States Department of Justice. On August 21, 2014, Ms. Weremblweski moved for a decision dismissing her petition, stating that the investigation of the facts and science supporting her case demonstrated she would be unable to prove entitlement to compensation. To receive compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, a petitioner must prove either a "Table Injury" or that the vaccine actually caused the injury. The Special Master noted that a petition must be supported by medical records or a medical opinion demonstrating a vaccine-related injury. Since Ms. Weremblweski determined she could not prove her case and the record lacked sufficient evidence of a vaccine-related injury, her claim was denied and the case was dismissed for insufficient proof. Special Master Thomas L. Gowen issued the decision. Judgment was to be entered accordingly in the absence of a motion for review.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioner Joyce Weremblweski alleged Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) following an influenza vaccine administered on October 9, 2009. The petition was filed on August 21, 2014. Petitioner later moved to dismiss her own petition, stating that investigation demonstrated she would be unable to prove entitlement to compensation. To be compensated, a petitioner must prove either a Table Injury or actual causation. The petition must be supported by medical records or a medical opinion demonstrating a vaccine-related injury. The Special Master found the record lacked sufficient evidence to demonstrate a vaccine-related injury. Petitioner's claim was denied and the case dismissed for insufficient proof by Special Master Thomas L. Gowen. Petitioner's counsel was John Robert Howie, Jr. Respondent's counsel was Gordon Shemin.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_12-vv-00741-0
Date issued/filed: 2014-09-11
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 08/21/2014) regarding 32 DECISION of Special Master (Signed by Special Master Thomas L. Gowen.)(mpj) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:12-vv-00741-UNJ Document 35 Filed 09/11/14 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
Case No. 12-741V
Filed: August 21, 2014
*************************************
JOYCE WEREMBLEWSKI, * UNPUBLISHED
*
Petitioner, *
* Special Master Gowen
v. *
*
SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Influenza (Flu) Vaccine;
AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS);
* Dismissal; Insufficient Proof.
Respondent. *
*************************************
John Robert Howie, Jr., Howie Law, P.C., Dallas, TX, for petitioner.
Gordon Shemin, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
DECISION1
On November 1, 2012, petitioner filed a Petition for Vaccine Compensation in the
National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (“the Program”),2 alleging that she suffered
from Guillain-Barré syndrome (“GBS”) as a result of receiving an influenza (“flu”) vaccination
on November 1, 2009.3
1 Because this decision contains a reasoned explanation for the undersigned’s action in this
case, the undersigned intends to post this decision on the United States Court of Federal Claims’
website, in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-347, 116 Stat.
2899, 2913 (Dec. 17, 2002). As provided by Vaccine Rule 18(b), each party has 14 days within
which to request redaction “of any information furnished by that party: (1) that is a trade secret
or commercial or financial in substance and is privileged or confidential; or (2) that includes
medical files or similar files, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted
invasion of privacy.” Vaccine Rule 18(b). Otherwise, “the entire” decision will be available to
the public. Id.
2 The Program comprises Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986,
Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755, codified as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-10 et seq.
(hereinafter “Vaccine Act” or “the Act”). Hereafter, individual section references will be to 42
U.S.C. § 300aa of the Act.
3 Petitioner later discovered that the date of vaccination was actually October 9, 2009, not
November 1, 2009. See Petitioner’s Motion for a Decision Dismissing Her Petition at 1.

Case 1:12-vv-00741-UNJ Document 35 Filed 09/11/14 Page 2 of 2
On August 21, 2014, petitioner moved for a decision dismissing her petition, on the
ground that “[t]he investigation of the facts and science supporting Petitioner’s case has
demonstrated to Petitioner that she will be unable to prove that she is entitled to compensation in
the Vaccine Program.” Petitioner’s Motion for a Decision Dismissing Her Petition at 1.
To receive compensation under the Program, petitioner must prove either 1) that she
suffered a “Table Injury” – i.e., an injury falling within the Vaccine Injury Table – corresponding
to her vaccination, or 2) that she suffered an injury that was actually caused by a vaccine. See §§
13(a)(1)(A) and 11(c)(1).
Under the Vaccine Act, a petitioner may not be awarded compensation based on the
petitioner’s claims alone. Rather, the petition must be supported by either the medical records or
by a medical opinion sufficient to demonstrate that the vaccinee’s injury is vaccine-related. § 13
(a)(1). In this case, petitioner has determined that she will be unable to prove her case, and the
undersigned finds that the record does not contain evidence sufficient to demonstrate that
petitioner was injured by a vaccine. For these reasons and in accordance with § 12(d)(3)(A),
petitioner’s claim for compensation is denied, and this case is dismissed for insufficient proof.
In the absence of a motion for review, the Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/ Thomas L. Gowen
Thomas L. Gowen
Special Master