VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_13-vv-00081
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_13-vv-00081
Petitioner: Michael Parker Rittiner
Filed: 2013-01-30
Decided: 2014-12-09
Vaccine: Trivalent Influenza
Vaccination date: 2010-01-22
Condition: fatigue, nausea, loss of appetite, difficulty concentrating
Outcome: dismissed
Award amount USD: 

AI-assisted case summary:
Michael Parker Rittiner filed a petition on January 30, 2013, seeking compensation under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986. He alleged that he received the H1N1 vaccine on December 17, 2009, and the Trivalent Influenza vaccine on January 22, 2010, and subsequently developed fatigue, nausea, loss of appetite, and difficulty concentrating. Petitioner was represented by Nancy Routh Meyers of Ward Black Law. Respondent was represented by Jennifer Leigh Reynaud of the United States Department of Justice. Special Master Lisa Hamilton-Fieldman presided over the case. The public decision does not describe the petitioner's clinical story, specific symptoms, medical tests, or treatments. The H1N1 vaccine is not covered under the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, but the Trivalent Influenza vaccine is. On September 23, 2014, Petitioner filed a Motion for a Dismissal Decision, stating that he would be unable to prove entitlement to compensation despite the preparation and production of expert reports. The Special Master noted that to receive compensation, Petitioner must prove either a "Table Injury" or that the injury was actually caused by a vaccine. The record did not contain evidence of a "Table Injury" or other persuasive evidence indicating that the injuries were caused by a vaccination. The medical records and expert reports were deemed insufficient to establish entitlement. Consequently, Special Master Hamilton-Fieldman issued a decision on September 25, 2014, dismissing the petition for insufficient proof. No compensation was awarded. Subsequently, on November 17, 2014, the parties filed a Stipulation of Fact Concerning Final Attorneys’ Fees and Costs, requesting a total payment of $26,000.00 for attorneys' fees and costs. Special Master Hamilton-Fieldman found that the petition was brought in good faith and had a reasonable basis, making an award for fees and costs appropriate. On December 9, 2014, she issued a decision awarding $26,000.00, payable jointly to Petitioner and Petitioner's counsel, Nancy R. Meyers.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioner Michael Parker Rittiner alleged injury from the H1N1 vaccine (received December 17, 2009) and Trivalent Influenza vaccine (received January 22, 2010), resulting in fatigue, nausea, loss of appetite, and difficulty concentrating. The H1N1 vaccine is not covered by the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. Petitioner voluntarily dismissed his petition on September 23, 2014, stating he could not prove entitlement despite expert reports. Special Master Lisa Hamilton-Fieldman dismissed the petition on September 25, 2014, for insufficient proof of a "Table Injury" or vaccine causation, as medical records and expert reports were insufficient. No compensation was awarded. Subsequently, on November 17, 2014, the parties stipulated to attorneys' fees and costs. Special Master Hamilton-Fieldman awarded $26,000.00 in attorneys' fees and costs on December 9, 2014, finding the petition was filed in good faith with a reasonable basis. Petitioner's counsel was Nancy R. Meyers of Ward Black Law.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_13-vv-00081-0
Date issued/filed: 2014-10-21
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 09/25/2014) regarding 20 DECISION of Special Master Signed by Special Master Lisa Hamilton-Fieldman. (dlb) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:13-vv-00081-UNJ Document 21 Filed 10/21/14 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 13-081V
Filed: September 25, 2014
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * UNPUBLISHED
MICHAEL PARKER RITTINER, *
* Special Master Hamilton-Fieldman
Petitioner, *
* Petitioner’s Motion for Dismissal
v. * Decision; Insufficient Proof of
* Causation; Vaccine Act Entitlement;
SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Influenza (“Flu”) Vaccine; Fatigue,
AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Nausea, Loss of Appetite, Difficulty
* Concentrating.
Respondent. *
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Nancy Routh Meyers, Ward Black Law, Greensboro, NC, for Petitioner.
Jennifer Leigh Reynaud, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
DECISION1
On January 30, 2013, Michael Parker Rittner filed a petition for compensation under the
National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 et seq. (2006) (“Vaccine
Act”). Petitioner alleged that he suffered from fatigue, loss of appetite, difficulty concentrating,
and nausea, and that this injury had been caused by the H1N1 vaccine received on December 17,
2009 and the Trivalent Influenza vaccine received on January 22, 2010.2 Petition (“Pet”) at 1-4.
1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the 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, § 205, 116
Stat. 2899, 2913 (codified as amended at 44 U.S.C. § 3501 and note (2006)). In accordance with
Vaccine Rule 18(b), a party has 14 days to identify and move to delete medical or other
information, that satisfies the criteria in § 300aa-12(d)(4)(B). Further, consistent with the rule
requirement, a motion for redaction must include a proposed redacted decision. If, upon review,
the undersigned agrees that the identified material fits within the requirements of that provision,
such material will be deleted from public access.
2 Under the Vaccine Act, a petition for vaccine compensation must contain documentation
demonstrating that the vaccine injured person “received a vaccine set forth in the Vaccine Injury
Table.” 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-11(c)(1)(A). The Vaccine Injury Table, located at 42 C.F.R. §
100.3(a), does not include the H1N1 vaccine, a monovalent influenza vaccine, only the trivalent
seasonal influenza vaccine. 42 C.F.R. § 100.3(a). Therefore, the H1N1 vaccine is not covered
under the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. Claims of injury resulting from the H1N1

Case 1:13-vv-00081-UNJ Document 21 Filed 10/21/14 Page 2 of 2
The information in the record does not show entitlement to an award under the Program.
On September 23, 2014, Petitioner filed a Motion for a Dismissal Decision. Motion, ECF
No. 19. In this Motion, Petitioner indicates that after a thorough review of the records, “he will
be unable to prove, despite the preparation and production of expert reports, that he is entitled to
compensation in the Vaccine Program.” Motion, ECF No.19. Petitioner further states that he
has been advised by his counsel that a decision dismissing his petition will result in a judgment
against him and will end all of his rights in the Vaccine Program. Motion, ECF No. 19.
To receive compensation under the Vaccine Act, Petitioner must prove either 1) that he
suffered a “Table Injury” – i.e., an injury falling within the Vaccine Injury Table – corresponding
to one of her vaccinations, or 2) that he suffered an injury that was actually caused by a vaccine.
See §§ 300aa-13(a)(1)(A) and 300aa-11(c)(1). An examination of the record did not uncover
any evidence that he suffered a “Table Injury.” Further, the record does not contain any other
persuasive evidence indicating that his injuries were caused by a vaccination.
Under the Vaccine Act, a petitioner may not be awarded compensation based solely on
the petitioner’s claims alone. Rather, the petition must be supported by either medical records or
by the opinion of a competent physician. § 300aa-13(a)(1). In this case, both the medical
records and the expert report are insufficient to establish entitlement to compensation.
Therefore, the only alternative remains to DENY this petition. Thus, 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/Lisa D. Hamilton-Fieldman
Lisa D. Hamilton-Fieldman
Special Master
vaccine are covered by the Countermeasures Injury Compensation
Program. See http://www.hrsa.gov/cicp/index.html. However, Petitioner also alleged injury
from the Trivalent Influenza vaccine, which is a covered vaccine.
2

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 2: USCOURTS-cofc-1_13-vv-00081-1
Date issued/filed: 2014-12-09
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 11/18/2014) regarding 24 DECISION Fees Stipulation/Proffer Signed by Special Master Lisa Hamilton-Fieldman. (dlb) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:13-vv-00081-UNJ Document 28 Filed 12/09/14 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 13-081V
Filed: November 18, 2014
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * UNPUBLISHED
MICHAEL PARKER RITTINER, *
* Special Master Hamilton-Fieldman
Petitioner, *
* Attorneys’ Fees and Costs;
v. * Reasonable Amount Requested to
* Which Respondent Does Not Object.
SECRETARY OF HEALTH *
AND HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
Respondent. *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Nancy R. Meyers, Ward Black Law, Greensboro, NC, for Petitioner.
Jennifer L. Reynaud, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
DECISION1
On January 30, 2013, Michael Parker Rittiner (“Petitioner”) filed a petition pursuant to
the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.2 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 et seq. (2006)
(“Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleged that he suffered from fatigue, loss of appetite, difficulty
concentrating, and nausea, and that this injury had been caused by the H1N1 vaccine received on
December 17, 2009 and the Trivalent Influenza vaccine received on January 22, 2010. Petition
(“Pet”) at 1-4. On September 25, 2014, the undersigned issued a decision dismissing the
1 Because this decision contains a reasoned explanation for the undersigned’s action in this case,
the undersigned intends to post this ruling on the website of the United States Court of Federal
Claims, in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-347, § 205, 116
Stat. 2899, 2913 (codified as amended at 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2006)). 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).
2 The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program is set forth in 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-1 to -34 (2006) (Vaccine Act or the Act). All citations in this decision to
individual sections of the Vaccine Act are to 42 U.S.C.A. § 300aa.
1

Case 1:13-vv-00081-UNJ Document 28 Filed 12/09/14 Page 2 of 2
petition.
On November 17, 2014, the parties filed a Stipulation of Fact Concerning Final
Attorneys’ Fees and Costs. This stipulation requests a total payment of $26,000.00, representing
total attorneys’ fees and costs. In compliance with General Order #9, Petitioner represents that
no personal, out-of-pocket expenses were incurred in proceeding on the petition.
The undersigned finds that the petition was brought in good faith and that there existed a
reasonable basis for the claim. Therefore, an award for fees and costs is appropriate, pursuant to
42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(b) and (e)(1). Further, the proposed amount seems reasonable and
appropriate. Accordingly, the undersigned hereby awards the amount of $26,000.00, in the
form of a check made payable jointly to Petitioner and Petitioner’s counsel, Nancy R.
Meyers.
In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the clerk of
the court SHALL ENTER JUDGMENT in accordance with the terms of the parties’
stipulation.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/ Lisa Hamilton-Fieldman
Lisa Hamilton-Fieldman
Special Master
2