Anthony Ragusa v. HHS - Influenza, transverse myelitis (2017)
Case summary [AI summaries can sometimes make mistakes]
Anthony Ragusa filed a petition on January 15, 2014, alleging that he suffered from transverse myelitis as a result of an influenza vaccination received on November 30, 2010. Mr.
Ragusa was represented by attorney Mark Kreuger. He initially stated that his symptoms began in mid-January 2011.
The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, filed a report and motion to dismiss, asserting that the claim was barred by the statute of limitations because the medical records indicated an earlier onset of symptoms. Following an onset hearing, the Special Master found that Mr.
Ragusa's painful urination began around January 4, 2011, his numbness began around January 8, 2011, and pain in his legs began on January 16, 2011. The Special Master's findings were issued on September 18, 2015.
Mr. Ragusa's attorney, Mark Kreuger, later withdrew from the case, and Mr.
Ragusa indicated he would proceed pro se. On April 4, 2017, Mr.
Ragusa filed a report from Dr. Herman Dick, who stated that the transverse myelitis could have been caused by an upper respiratory infection in November 2010 or the flu vaccination on November 30, 2010.
However, Dr. Dick also stated that painful urination was not a manifestation of transverse myelitis but was due to a prostate infection.
The respondent filed a second motion to dismiss on June 5, 2017, reiterating that the petition was filed outside the 36-month statute of limitations, citing the Special Master's earlier findings of fact. The respondent also argued that Dr.
Dick's report did not present a sufficient medical theory linking the flu vaccine to the transverse myelitis. Mr.
Ragusa did not file a response to this motion. Special Master Christian J.
Moran reviewed the case. The Special Master noted that the petition was filed on January 15, 2014, which is more than 36 months after the onset of numbness around January 8, 2011.
The Special Master also noted the absence of any equitable tolling arguments. Consequently, the case was dismissed as untimely filed.
The decision was issued on September 7, 2017.