VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-00327
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-00327
Petitioner: C.P.
Filed: 2015-03-03
Decided: 2017-02-03
Vaccine: MMR
Vaccination date: 2012-04-12
Condition: encephalopathy and behavioral changes
Outcome: dismissed
Award amount USD: 

AI-assisted case summary:
Philip and April Power filed a petition for vaccine compensation on March 3, 2015, on behalf of their minor child, C.P. They alleged that shortly after receiving a measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine on April 12, 2012, C.P. suffered encephalopathy and behavioral changes. The Special Master noted that to receive compensation, a petitioner must prove either a "Table Injury" or that the injury was actually caused by the vaccine. The record did not contain evidence of a "Table Injury." Furthermore, the public decision does not describe the onset of symptoms, specific clinical details, or any medical tests or treatments. The decision emphasized that claims cannot be based solely on the petitioner's assertions but must be supported by medical records or a competent physician's opinion. As the petitioners offered no such supporting medical opinion, and the medical records were insufficient, the case was dismissed for lack of proof. On January 6, 2017, the petitioners filed a motion to dismiss the petition themselves, which was granted by Special Master Mindy Michaels Roth. The case was dismissed for insufficient proof, and judgment was entered accordingly. The attorneys for the petitioner were Mark Theodore Sadaka and Mark T. Sadaka, LLC. The attorney for the respondent was Camille Michelle Collett.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioners Philip and April Power, on behalf of minor C.P., alleged that C.P. suffered encephalopathy and behavioral changes shortly after receiving a measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine on April 12, 2012. The Special Master found that the record did not contain evidence of a "Table Injury" or persuasive evidence that C.P.'s alleged injury was vaccine-caused. The public decision does not describe the specific mechanism of injury or name any medical experts. Petitioners failed to provide supporting medical records or a competent physician's opinion. The case was dismissed for insufficient proof by Special Master Mindy Michaels Roth on February 3, 2017. Petitioners later filed a motion to dismiss the petition, which was granted. Mark Theodore Sadaka represented the petitioners, and Camille Michelle Collett represented the respondent.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-00327-0
Date issued/filed: 2017-02-03
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 01/09/2017) regarding 47 DECISION of Special Master Mindy Michaels Roth. Signed by Special Master Mindy Michaels Roth. (jo) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:15-vv-00327-UNJ Document 48 Filed 02/03/17 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 15-327V
(Filed: January 9, 2017)
UNPUBLISHED
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
PHILIP POWER and APRIL POWER, *
As the Parents and Natural Guardians * Dismissal; Measles-mumps-rubella
Of, C.P., a Minor, * (“MMR”) Vaccine;
* Encephalopathy; No Expert Report.
Petitioners, *
*
v. *
*
SECRETARY OF HEALTH *
AND HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
Respondent. *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Mark Theodore Sadaka, Mark T. Sadaka, LLC, Englewood, NJ, for petitioner.
Camille Michelle Collett, U.S. Dept. of Justice, Washington, DC for respondent.
DECISION1
Roth, Special Master:
On March 3, 2015, Philip Power and April Power (“petitioners”) filed a petition for
Vaccine Compensation in the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program [“the Program”],2
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
1

Case 1:15-vv-00327-UNJ Document 48 Filed 02/03/17 Page 2 of 2
on behalf of their minor child, C.P. Petitioners alleged that shortly after receiving a measles-
mumps-rubella (“MMR”) vaccine on April, 12, 2012, C.P. suffered encephalopathy and behavioral
changes. The information in the record, however, does not show entitlement to an award under the
Program. On January 6, 2017, petitioner filed a “motion to dismiss petition” requesting that the
case be dismissed. ECF No. 46.
To receive compensation under the Program, a petitioner must prove either 1) that he
suffered a “Table Injury” – i.e., an injury falling within the Vaccine Injury Table – corresponding
to his vaccination, or 2) that he 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 C.P.
suffered a “Table Injury.” Further, the record does not contain persuasive evidence indicating
that C.P.’s alleged injury was vaccine-caused or in any way vaccine-related.
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 petitioners’ claim, a medical opinion must be offered in support.
Petitioners, however, have offered no such opinion that supports a finding of entitlement.
Accordingly, it is clear from the record in this case that petitioners have failed to
demonstrate either that C.P. 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.
s/Mindy Michaels Roth
Mindy Michaels Roth
Special Master
“Vaccine Act” or “the Act”). Hereafter, individual section references will be to 42 U.S.C. §
300aa of the Act.
2