VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_13-vv-00313
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_13-vv-00313
Petitioner: I.G.
Filed: 2013-05-05
Decided: 2014-10-15
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 1996-02-07
Condition: Guillain-Barré syndrome allegedly following influenza vaccine
Outcome: dismissed
Award amount USD: 

AI-assisted case summary:
On May 5, 2013, Sandy Richardson filed a petition under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program on behalf of her minor child, I.G. The petition alleged that an influenza vaccine administered on February 7, 1996, caused I.G. to suffer Guillain-Barré syndrome. The public decision does not state I.G.'s exact age, describe I.G.'s pre-vaccination health, identify the onset date for weakness or other neurologic symptoms, summarize hospitalization or diagnostic testing, or provide a treating physician's narrative. After gathering the relevant medical records, petitioner was unable to identify an appropriate medical expert willing to offer an opinion on vaccine causation. On September 24, 2014, petitioner moved for judgment on the record and sought dismissal of the claim. Special Master Brian H. Corcoran issued a decision on October 15, 2014, dismissing the case for insufficient proof. He found no evidence that I.G. had suffered a "Table Injury" as defined by the Vaccine Injury Table, nor was there any medical expert opinion or other persuasive evidence showing that the alleged Guillain-Barré syndrome was caused by the influenza vaccine. The Special Master noted that the Vaccine Act does not allow compensation based solely on a petitioner's claims and requires support from medical records or a competent physician's opinion. Because the petitioner could not provide expert testimony supporting causation, the claim could not succeed. No injury compensation was awarded. A separate decision on attorneys' fees and costs was issued on October 21, 2014. The parties stipulated to $21,500.00 in fees and costs, payable jointly to Sandy Richardson and her counsel, Lawrence R. Cohan of Anapol Schwartz. Petitioner represented that she had not incurred reimbursable costs. This award was for litigation fees and costs, not for I.G.'s alleged vaccine injury. Petitioner was represented by Lawrence R. Cohan.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioner Sandy Richardson filed on behalf of minor I.G. alleging Guillain-Barré syndrome following an influenza vaccine administered on February 7, 1996. The case was dismissed for insufficient proof on October 15, 2014, by Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. The public decision does not provide I.G.'s age, symptom onset date, clinical course, diagnostic testing, or hospitalization details. Petitioner was unable to identify a medical expert to opine on causation. Special Master Corcoran found no evidence of a "Table Injury" and no medical expert opinion or other persuasive evidence demonstrating vaccine causation. Compensation under the Vaccine Act requires more than petitioner allegations alone. Entitlement was dismissed. A separate decision on October 21, 2014, awarded $21,500.00 jointly to petitioner Sandy Richardson and her counsel Lawrence R. Cohan for attorneys' fees and costs, as stipulated by the parties. Petitioner was represented by Lawrence R. Cohan of Anapol Schwartz.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_13-vv-00313-0
Date issued/filed: 2014-11-05
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 10/15/2014) regarding 30 DECISION of Special Master (Signed by Special Master Brian H. Corcoran.)(mpj) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:13-vv-00313-UNJ Document 35 Filed 11/05/14 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 13-313V
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*
SANDY RICHARDSON, *
For I.G., as her parent, *
* Filed: October 15, 2014
Petitioner, *
* Decision Dismissing the Petition for
v. * Insufficient Proof of Causation;
* Vaccine Act Entitlement; Denial
SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Without Hearing
AND HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
Respondent. *
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Lawrence R. Cohan, Anapol, Schwartz, et al., Philadelphia, PA, for Petitioner.
Jennifer L. Reynaud, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
DECISION DISSMISSING CASE FOR INSUFFICIENT PROOF1
On May 5, 2013, Sandy Richardson filed a petition on behalf of her minor child, I.G., for
Vaccine Compensation in the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program2 alleging that the
1 Because this decision contains a reasoned explanation for my action in this case, I will 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 note (2006)). As provided by 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-12(d)(4)(B),
however, the parties may object to the published decision’s inclusion of certain kinds of
confidential information. To do so, Vaccine Rule 18(b) permits each party 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 decision will be available to the
public. Id.
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.A. ' 300aa-10-' 300aa-34 (West 1991 & Supp. 2002). All citations in this decision to
individual sections of the Vaccine Act are to 42 U.S.C.A. ' 300aa.

Case 1:13-vv-00313-UNJ Document 35 Filed 11/05/14 Page 2 of 2
influenza (“flu”) vaccine he received on February 7, 1996, caused I.G. to suffer Guillain-Barré
syndrome (“GBS”).
After gathering all of his relevant medical records, Ms. Richardson was unable to identify
an appropriate medical expert willing to opine on the causation issues in this case. Petitioner
subsequently filed a “Motion for Judgment on the Record” on September 24, 2014, seeking a
dismissal of her claim.
To receive compensation under the Program, Ms. Richardson must prove either 1) that
I.G. suffered a “Table Injury” – i.e., an injury falling within the Vaccine Injury Table –
corresponding to one of I.G.’s vaccinations, or 2) that I.G. suffered an injury that was actually
caused by a vaccine. See §§13(a)(1)(A) and 11(c)(1). An examination of the record, however,
did not uncover any evidence that I.G. suffered a “Table Injury.” Further, the record does not
contain a medical expert’s opinion or any other persuasive evidence indicating that I.G.’s alleged
injury was vaccine-caused.
Under the Act, a petitioner may not be given a Program award 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. §13(a)(1). In this case, because of Petitioner’s inability to
proffer expert testimony in support of her claim, there is insufficient evidence in the record for
Ms. Richardson to meet her burden of proof. Petitioner’s claim therefore cannot succeed and
must be dismissed. §11(c)(1)(A).
Thus, this case is dismissed for insufficient proof. The Clerk shall enter judgment
accordingly.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/ Brian H. Corcoran
Brian H. Corcoran
Special Master

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 2: USCOURTS-cofc-1_13-vv-00313-1
Date issued/filed: 2014-11-13
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 10/21/2014) regarding 32 DECISION Fees Stipulation/Proffer ( Signed by Special Master Brian H. Corcoran.)(mpj) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:13-vv-00313-UNJ Document 36 Filed 11/13/14 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 13-313V
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*
SANDY RICHARDSON, *
For I.G., as her parent, *
* Filed: October 21, 2014
Petitioner, *
* Decision; Attorneys’
v. * Fees & Costs
*
SECRETARY OF HEALTH *
AND HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
Respondent. *
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Lawrence R. Cohan, Anapol, Schwartz, Philadelphia, PA, for Petitioner.
Jennifer L. Reynaud, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS DECISION1
On May 5, 2013, Sandy Richardson filed a petition on behalf of her minor child, I.G.,
seeking compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.2 After
proceeding in the matter for a period of time, Petitioner filed a motion seeking dismissal of her
petition on September 24, 2014. I subsequently issued a decision finding that there was
insufficient evidence in the record for Petitioner to meet her burden of proof, and therefore
Petitioner’s claim could not succeed and must be dismissed.
1 Because this ruling contains a reasoned explanation for my action in this case, it will be posted 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 42 U.S.C. §
300aa-12(d)(4)(B), however, the parties may object to the inclusion of certain kinds of confidential information. To
do so, Vaccine Rule 18(b) provides that 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 ruling will be available to the public.
Id.
2 The National Vaccine Injury Compensation 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.A. ' 300aa-10 – 34 (2006))
[hereinafter “Vaccine Act” or “the Act”]. Individual sections references hereafter will be to ' 300aa of the Act.

Case 1:13-vv-00313-UNJ Document 36 Filed 11/13/14 Page 2 of 2
On October 20, 2014, the parties filed a stipulation regarding attorneys’ fees and costs.
The parties have stipulated that Petitioner’s counsel should receive a total of $21,500.00. This
amount represents a sum to which Respondent does not object. In addition, in compliance with
General Order #9, Petitioner has represented that she did not incur any reimbursable costs in
proceeding on this petition.
I approve the requested amount for attorneys’ fees and costs as reasonable. Accordingly,
an award of $21,500.00 should be made in the form of a check payable jointly to Petitioner
Sandy Richardson and Petitioner’s counsel, Lawrence R. Cohan. 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.3
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/ Brian H. Corcoran
Brian H. Corcoran
Special Master
3 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties may expedite entry of judgment by each filing (either jointly or
separately) a notice renouncing their right to seek review.
2