VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-00038
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-00038
Petitioner: Linda Roche
Filed: 2016-02-05
Decided: 2016-09-02
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 2013-11-15
Condition: polymyalgia rheumatica and fibromyalgia
Outcome: dismissed
Award amount USD: 

AI-assisted case summary:
Linda Roche filed a petition for vaccine compensation on February 5, 2016, alleging that the influenza and Tdap vaccinations she received on November 15, 2013, caused her to develop polymyalgia rheumatica and fibromyalgia. The petition was filed in the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. Ms. Roche was represented by Paul R. Brazil, Esq., and the respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, was represented by Althea W. Davis, Esq. Special Master Mindy Michaels Roth presided over the case. To be eligible for compensation, a petitioner must demonstrate either a "Table Injury" corresponding to a vaccination or prove that the injury was actually caused by a vaccine. The record in this case did not contain evidence of a "Table Injury." Furthermore, the public decision stated that the record did not provide persuasive evidence that the alleged injuries were vaccine-caused. The decision emphasized that a petitioner cannot receive an award based solely on their claims; the petition must be supported by medical records or a competent physician's opinion. In this instance, there were insufficient medical records and no supporting medical opinion offered by the petitioner. Consequently, Ms. Roche moved to dismiss her own petition on January 14, 2016. The case was subsequently dismissed for insufficient proof, and judgment was entered accordingly.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioner Linda Roche alleged that influenza and Tdap vaccinations received on November 15, 2013, caused polymyalgia rheumatica and fibromyalgia. The case was dismissed for insufficient proof. The public decision stated there was no evidence of a "Table Injury" and insufficient persuasive evidence that the alleged injuries were vaccine-caused. The petitioner did not provide supporting medical records or a competent physician's opinion. Petitioner moved to dismiss her own petition. Special Master Mindy Michaels Roth issued the decision. Attorneys for petitioner were Paul R. Brazil, Esq., and for respondent, Althea W. Davis, Esq. The case was dismissed on September 2, 2016.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-00038-0
Date issued/filed: 2016-09-02
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 2/5/2016) regarding 23 DECISION of Special Master. Signed by Special Master Mindy Michaels Roth. (mw) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:15-vv-00038-UNJ Document 32 Filed 09/02/16 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
Filed: February 5, 2016
No. 15-38V
*******************************************
*
LINDA ROCHE, * Dismissal; Insufficient Proof;
* Influenza (Flu) Vaccine; Tetanus
Petitioner, * Diphtheria Pertussis (TDAP)
* Vaccine; Polymyalgia
v. * Rheumatica; Fibromyalgia
*
SECRETARY OF HEALTH *
AND HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
Respondent. *
*
*******************************************
Paul R. Brazil, Esq., Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA for petitioner.
Althea W. Davis, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
DECISION1
Roth, Special Master:
On January 12, 2015, Linda Roche [“Ms. Roche” or “petitioner”] filed a petition for Vaccine
Compensation in the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program [“the Program”],2 alleging
that the influenza and tetanus-diphtheria-pertussis [TDAP] vaccinations that she received on
November 15, 2013 caused her to suffer from polymyalgia rheumatica and fibromyalgia. The
information in the record, however, does not show entitlement to an award under the Program. On
January 14, 2016, petitioner moved for a decision dismissing this petition.
To receive compensation under the Program, petitioner must prove either 1) that she
suffered a “Table Injury”—i.e., an injury falling within the Vaccine Injury Table—corresponding
to one of her vaccinations, or 2) that she suffered an injury that was actually caused by a vaccine.
See §§ 13(a)(1)(A) 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.
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 1:15-vv-00038-UNJ Document 32 Filed 09/02/16 Page 2 of 2
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 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 she suffered a “Table Injury” or that her 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.
s/Mindy Michaels Roth
Mindy Michaels Roth
Special Master