Harvard Davis v. HHS - Influenza, Guillain-Barré Syndrome (“GBS”) and chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (“CIDP”) (2026)

Harvard Davis filed a petition on October 14, 2014, alleging that an influenza vaccine administered on August 19, 2013, caused him to develop Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) and chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP). Mr.

Davis, born June 12, 1957, had a significant medical history including hypertension, uncontrolled Type 2 diabetes with peripheral neuropathy and vascular complications, multiple spinal surgeries, and suspected spinal cord compression. Following the vaccine, he reported widespread body pain, stiffness, weakness, and difficulty with movement, with symptoms worsening over several weeks.

Multiple physicians provided differing diagnoses, including GBS, CIDP, myopathy, and other neuropathies, with some physicians prescribing treatments such as steroids and IVIG. The case involved extensive expert testimony regarding the potential link between the flu vaccine and CIDP through theories of molecular mimicry and molecular mimics like Contactin-1 and Neurofascin.

Petitioner's expert, Dr. Lawrence Steinman, opined that the influenza vaccine triggered an immune-mediated inflammatory reaction, potentially through molecular mimicry, leading to CIDP, and that Mr.

Davis's comorbidities exacerbated the condition. Respondent's expert, Dr.

Vinay Chaudhry, contended that Mr. Davis's symptoms were more consistent with his comorbidities, particularly diabetes, and that the medical evidence did not support a diagnosis of CIDP.

Special Master Mindy Michaels Roth found that Mr. Davis's evidence was sufficient to demonstrate that the flu vaccine was a substantial triggering factor for probable CIDP.

The Special Master noted that Mr. Davis's comorbidities complicated the assessment of his ongoing debility but concluded that the vaccine, in combination with these comorbidities, was a substantial factor in causing his current disability.

The case proceeded on an entitlement track, and the Special Master ruled in favor of the petitioner for entitlement to compensation, with the matter to proceed to damages. Update: a ruling awarding damages filed 2026-06-08 resolved the case for $585,745.