VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_13-vv-00967
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_13-vv-00967
Petitioner: Benjamin Follen
Filed: 2015-03-26
Decided: 2015-06-10
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 
Condition: brachial plexitis
Outcome: dismissed
Award amount USD: 

AI-assisted case summary:
Benjamin Follen filed a petition for vaccine compensation on March 26, 2015, alleging he suffered from brachial plexitis as a result of the influenza vaccine. The Special Master, Thomas L. Gowen, reviewed the record and found that it did not contain sufficient evidence to prove entitlement to an award under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. Specifically, the record lacked evidence of a "Table Injury" or persuasive evidence that the alleged injury was actually caused by the vaccine. The Special Master noted that under the Act, a petition cannot be based solely on the petitioner's claims but must be supported by medical records or the opinion of a competent physician. In this case, the petitioner failed to provide either. Consequently, on June 10, 2015, Special Master Gowen issued a decision dismissing the petition for insufficient proof. Subsequently, on May 20, 2015, the parties filed a stipulation regarding attorneys' fees and costs. Special Master Gowen awarded $14,137.82 in fees and costs, payable jointly to the petitioner and his attorney, Howard Scott Gold, finding that the petition was brought in good faith and had a reasonable basis. Claudia Gangi, Esq., represented the respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioner Benjamin Follen alleged brachial plexitis as a result of the influenza vaccine. The petition was filed on March 26, 2015. The Special Master, Thomas L. Gowen, dismissed the petition on June 10, 2015, for insufficient proof. The public decision does not describe the specific vaccine date, petitioner's age, or any medical records, physician's opinions, or expert testimony presented. The Special Master found no evidence of a "Table Injury" and insufficient evidence that the injury was "actually caused" by the vaccine, as required by the Act. Petitioner's counsel was Howard Scott Gold, Esq., and respondent's counsel was Claudia Gangi, Esq. A subsequent stipulation for attorneys' fees and costs resulted in an award of $14,137.82 on June 10, 2015.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_13-vv-00967-0
Date issued/filed: 2015-06-10
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 03/26/2015) regarding 34 DECISION of Special Master ( Signed by Special Master Thomas L. Gowen.)(mpj) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:13-vv-00967-UNJ Document 42 Filed 06/10/15 Page 1 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 13-0967V
Filed: March 26, 2015
(Not to be published)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
BENJAMIN FOLLEN, *
*
Petitioner, * Dismissal Decision; Flu; Brachial Plexitis
v. *
*
SECRETARY OF HEALTH *
AND HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
Respondent. *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Howard Scott Gold, Esq., Gold Law Firm, LLC, Wellesley Hills, MA for petitioner.
Claudia Gangi, Esq., U.S. Dep’t. of Justice, Washington, DC for respondent.
DECISION1
Gowen, Special Master:
On December 9, 2013, petitioner filed a petition for Vaccine Compensation in the
National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program [“the Program”],2 alleging that he
suffered from brachial plexitis as a result of the influenza vaccine. The information in the
record, however, does not show entitlement to an award under the Program. On March
26, 2015, petitioner moved for a decision dismissing this petition.
To receive compensation under the Program, petitioner must prove either 1) that
he suffered a “Table Injury” – i.e., an injury falling within the Vaccine Injury Table, or 2)
that he suffered an injury that was actually caused by a vaccine. See §§ 13(a)(1)(A)
1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I intend
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 note (2006)). In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), petitioner have 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, I agree that the identified material fits within the requirements of that provision, I will
delete such material from public access.
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.

Case 1:13-vv-00967-UNJ Document 42 Filed 06/10/15 Page 2 of 2
and 11(c)(1). An examination of the record did not uncover any evidence that petitioner
suffered a “Table Injury.” Further, the record does not contain persuasive evidence
indicating that petitioner’s alleged injury was vaccine-caused.
Under the Act, 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
there are insufficient medical records supporting petitioner’s claim, a medical opinion
must be offered in support. Petitioner, however, has offered no such opinion that
supports a finding of entitlement.
Accordingly, it is clear from the record in this case that petitioner has failed to
demonstrate either that he suffered a “Table Injury” or that his injuries were “actually
caused” by a vaccination. Thus, this case is dismissed for insufficient proof. The
Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/sThomas L. Gowen
Thomas L. Gowen
Special Master
2

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 2: USCOURTS-cofc-1_13-vv-00967-1
Date issued/filed: 2015-06-10
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 05/20/2015) regarding 38 DECISION Fees Stipulation/Proffer ( Signed by Special Master Thomas L. Gowen.)(mpj) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:13-vv-00967-UNJ Document 43 Filed 06/10/15 Page 1 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 13-0967V
Filed: May 20, 2015
(Not to be published)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
BENJAMIN FOLLEN, *
*
Petitioner, * Attorneys’ Fees and Costs; Stipulation
v. *
*
SECRETARY OF HEALTH *
AND HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
Respondent. *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Howard Scott Gold, Esq., Gold Law Firm, LLC, Wellesley Hills, MA for petitioner.
Claudia Gangi, Esq., U.S. Dep’t. of Justice, Washington, DC for respondent.
DECISION ON ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS1
Gowen, Special Master:
In this case under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program,2 I issued
a Decision on March 26, 2015, dismissing this Petition pursuant to petitioner’s motion to
dismiss filed on March 25, 2015. On April 30, 2015, petitioner filed a motion for
attorney’s fees. Subsequently, on May 20, 2015, the parties filed a Stipulation of Fact
concerning attorneys’ fees and costs. Pursuant to General Order #9, petitioner’s
counsel also represented that petitioner incurred no out-of-pocket expenses in this
matter.
The parties’ stipulation indicates that respondent does not object to the amended
amount of $14,137.82 that petitioner is requesting for attorneys’ fees and costs.
1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I intend
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 note (2006)). In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), petitioner has 14 days to identify and
move to delete 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
delete such material from public access.
2 The applicable statutory provisions defining the program are found at 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-10 et seq.
(2006).

Case 1:13-vv-00967-UNJ Document 43 Filed 06/10/15 Page 2 of 2
I find that this 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, I hereby award:
 a lump sum of $14,137.82 in the form of a check payable jointly to
petitioner and petitioner’s attorney, Howard Scott Gold, Esq., for
petitioner’s attorneys’ fees and costs.
The clerk of the court shall enter judgment in accordance herewith.3
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/sThomas L. Gowen
Thomas L. Gowen
Special Master
3 Entry of judgment can be expedited by each party’s filing of a notice renouncing the right to seek review.
See Vaccine Rule 11(a).
2