VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-00726
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-00726
Petitioner: R.H.
Filed: 2015-07-13
Decided: 2017-04-10
Vaccine: DTaP
Vaccination date: 2014-01-16
Condition: epilepsy and developmental delays
Outcome: dismissed
Award amount USD: 

AI-assisted case summary:
On July 13, 2015, Jasmatie and Ryon Hardeen, as parents and natural guardians for their minor daughter R.H., filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. They alleged that R.H. received DTaP, IPV, Hib, PCV7, and Rotavirus vaccinations on January 16, 2014, and that these vaccines caused her to suffer epilepsy and developmental delays. The respondent was the Secretary of Health and Human Services. The public decision does not describe the specific onset of symptoms, medical records, or any expert opinions filed in support of the petition. On March 10, 2017, the petitioners moved for a dismissal of their claim, stating that an investigation of the facts and science demonstrated they would be unable to prove R.H. was entitled to compensation under the Program. They conceded that the medical records were insufficient to prove their claim and that no expert opinion had been filed to support the allegations. The respondent did not oppose the dismissal. Special Master Herbrina Sanders reviewed the available information and noted that to receive compensation, petitioners must prove either a "Table Injury" or that the injury was actually caused by a vaccine. The record did not contain evidence of a "Table Injury" or persuasive evidence that the alleged injury was caused by the vaccination. The Special Master also stated that awards cannot be based solely on claims alone but must be supported by medical records or a competent physician's opinion, neither of which was sufficiently present in the record. Consequently, the case was dismissed for insufficient proof. The Clerk was ordered to enter judgment accordingly. Clifford J. Shoemaker represented the petitioners, and Linda S. Renzi represented the respondent.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioners R.H., by her parents Jasmatie and Ryon Hardeen, alleged that DTaP, IPV, Hib, PCV7, and Rotavirus vaccinations administered on January 16, 2014, caused epilepsy and developmental delays. The public decision does not specify the theory of causation or any proposed mechanism. Petitioners moved for dismissal, conceding insufficient proof due to inadequate medical records and the absence of a supportive expert opinion. The Special Master Herbrina Sanders noted the lack of evidence for a "Table Injury" or actual causation by the vaccines. The case was dismissed for insufficient proof. Petitioner counsel was Clifford J. Shoemaker; respondent counsel was Linda S. Renzi. The decision date was April 10, 2017.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-00726-0
Date issued/filed: 2017-04-10
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 03/14/2017) regarding 52 DECISION of Special Master Signed by Special Master Herbrina Sanders. (azc) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:15-vv-00726-UNJ Document 53 Filed 04/10/17 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 15-726V
Filed: March 14, 2017
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * UNPUBLISHED
R.H., by her parents and natural guardians, *
JASMATIE and RYON HARDEEN, * Special Master Sanders
*
Petitioners, * Dismissal; Diphtheria-Tetanus-
* acellular Pertussis (“DTaP”)
v. * Vaccine; Inactivated Polio (“IPV”)
* Vaccine; Haemophilus Influenza
SECRETARY OF HEALTH * (“Hib”) Vaccine; Pneumococcal
AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Conjugate (“PCV7”) Vaccine;
* Rotavirus Vaccine; Epilepsy;
Respondent. * Developmental Delays.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Clifford J. Shoemaker, Shoemaker, Gentry & Knickelbein, Vienna, VA, for Petitioners.
Linda S. Renzi, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
DECISION1
On July 13, 2015, Jasmatie and Ryon Hardeen (“Petitioners”) filed a petition on
behalf of their daughter, R.H., for compensation in the National Vaccine Injury
Compensation Program [“the Program”].2 Pet. 1, ECF No. 1. They alleged that the
Diphtheria-Tetanus-acellular Pertussis (“DTaP”), inactivated polio (“IPV”), haemophilus
influenza (“Hib”), pneumococcal conjugate (“PCV7”), and Rotavirus vaccinations R.H.
received on January 16, 2014 caused her to suffer epilepsy and developmental delays.
Pet. 1, ECF No. 1; Resp’t Rep. 1, ECF No. 20. The information in the record, however,
does not show entitlement to an award under the Program.
1 This decision shall be posted on the website of the United States Court of Federal Claims,
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 (2012)). As provided by
Vaccine Rule 18(b), each party has 14 days within which to request redaction “of any
information furnished by that party: (1) that is a trade secret or commercial or financial in
substance and is privileged or confidential; or (2) that includes medical files or similar files,
the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy.”
Vaccine Rule 18(b).
2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755.
Hereinafter, for ease of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the
pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa (2012).

Case 1:15-vv-00726-UNJ Document 53 Filed 04/10/17 Page 2 of 2
On March 10, 2017, Petitioners moved for a decision dismissing their claim.
Petitioners conceded that “[a]n investigation of the facts and science supporting this case
has demonstrated to [Petitioners] that [they] will be unable to prove that [R.H.] is entitled
to compensation in the Vaccine Program.” Mot. Dis. Pet. 1, ECF No. 51. Petitioners
filed this motion without opposition from Respondent. Id. at 2.
To receive compensation under the Program, Petitioners must prove either 1) that
R.H. suffered a “Table Injury”—i.e., an injury falling within the Vaccine Injury Table—
corresponding to the vaccination, or 2) that she suffered an injury that was actually
caused by a vaccine. See §§ 13(a)(1)(A), 11(c)(1). An examination of the record did not
uncover any evidence that R.H. suffered a “Table Injury.” Further, the record does not
contain persuasive evidence that her alleged injury was caused by the influenza
vaccination.
Under the Act, petitioners may not be given a Program award based solely on
their claims alone. Rather, the petition must be supported by medical records or the
opinion of a competent physician. § 13(a)(1). In this case, the medical records are
insufficient to prove Petitioners’ claim, and Petitioners have not filed a supportive
opinion from an expert witness. Therefore, this case must be dismissed for insufficient
proof. The Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Herbrina D. Sanders
Herbrina D. Sanders
Special Master
2