VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-00882
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-00882
Petitioner: J.B.A.
Filed: 2015-11-15
Decided: 2017-12-12
Vaccine: DTaP
Vaccination date: 2012-08-22
Condition: seizures, developmental delay, and encephalopathy
Outcome: dismissed
Award amount USD: 

AI-assisted case summary:
Jaclyn Rene Bales, on behalf of her minor child J.B.A., filed a petition on November 15, 2017, alleging that a diphtheria-tetanus-acellular pertussis (DTaP) vaccination administered on August 22, 2012, caused J.B.A. to suffer from seizures, developmental delay, and encephalopathy. The respondent was the Secretary of Health and Human Services. The public decision does not describe the specific symptoms, onset, medical records, or treatments related to J.B.A.'s condition. J.B.A. has an SCN1A gene mutation, which is associated with neurological conditions like Dravet Syndrome. The petitioner argued that the DTaP vaccination, rather than the gene mutation, caused J.B.A.'s condition, noting that the mother also carries the gene but is asymptomatic. The petitioner initially sought compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. However, after retaining new counsel and being granted additional time to obtain expert reports from a geneticist and a neurologist or immunologist, the petitioner filed a motion to dismiss her claim on November 14, 2017. The petitioner stated that an investigation of the facts and science demonstrated she would be unable to prove entitlement to compensation. The respondent reserved the right to challenge the timeliness of the claim and oppose any application for attorneys' fees and costs but did not oppose the motion for dismissal. The petitioner intended to reject any Vaccine Program judgment and file a civil action. Special Master Thomas L. Gowen agreed that the petitioner would be unable to prove entitlement to compensation due to insufficient proof and dismissed the case. The public decision does not name the petitioner's counsel or the respondent's counsel. No award amount was granted as the case was dismissed.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioner Jaclyn Rene Bales, on behalf of minor J.B.A., alleged that a DTaP vaccination on August 22, 2012, caused seizures, developmental delay, and encephalopathy. J.B.A. has an SCN1A gene mutation, associated with neurological conditions. Petitioner argued the vaccine, not the gene mutation (which the asymptomatic mother also carries), caused the injury. The public decision does not specify a Table Injury or provide expert reports. Petitioner, after retaining new counsel, moved to dismiss, stating she could not prove a causal link. Special Master Thomas L. Gowen dismissed the case for insufficient proof, agreeing petitioner could not establish entitlement. Petitioner intended to reject the judgment and file a civil action. Attorneys for petitioner were Renee J. Gentry and for respondent was Camille M. Collett. Decision date was December 12, 2017.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-00882-1
Date issued/filed: 2017-12-12
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 11/15/2017) regarding 49 DECISION of Special Master ( Signed by Special Master Thomas L. Gowen.)(mpj) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:15-vv-00882-UNJ Document 53 Filed 12/12/17 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
Filed: November 15, 2017
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
JACLYN RENE BALES, on behalf * UNPUBLISHED
of her minor child, J.B.A., *
* No. 15-882V
Petitioner, *
v. * Special Master Gowen
*
SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Petitioner’s Motion for Dismissal;
AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Diphtheria-Tetanus-Acellular Pertussis
* Vaccination; Seizure Disorder;
Respondent. * SCN1A Gene Mutation.
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Renee J. Gentry, Vaccine Injury Clinic, George Washington University Law School, Washington,
DC, for petitioner.
Camille M. Collett, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC for respondent.
DECISION1
On August 17, 2015, Jaclyn Rene Bales (“petitioner”) filed a petition on behalf of her
minor child, J.B.A., pursuant to the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.2 On October
6, 2015, petitioner filed an Amended Petition. Petitioner alleged that as a result of receiving a
diphtheria-tetanus-acellular pertussis (“DTaP”) vaccination on August 22, 2012, J.B.A. suffers
from seizures, developmental delay, and encephalopathy. Petition at 1-2; Amended Petition.
On November 14, 2017, petitioner filed a motion for a decision dismissing her petition.
Petitioner’s Motion (ECF No. 48). It provides that an investigation of the facts and science… has
demonstrated to petitioner that she will be unable to prove that she is entitled to compensation in
the Vaccine Program.” Id. at 1. In these circumstances, to proceed further would be unreasonable
1 Pursuant to the E-Government Act of 2002, see 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012), because this decision contains a
reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I intend to post it on the website of the United States Court of
Federal Claims. The court’s website is at http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/aggregator/sources/7. Before the decision is
posted on the court’s website, each party has 14 days to file a motion requesting 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). “An objecting party must provide the court with a proposed
redacted version of the decision.” Id. If neither party files a motion for redaction within 14 days, the decision will
be posted on the court’s website without any changes. Id.
2 The Program comprises Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, 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.
1

Case 1:15-vv-00882-UNJ Document 53 Filed 12/12/17 Page 2 of 2
and would waste the resources of the Court, the respondent, and the Vaccine Program. Id.
Petitioner understands that a decision by the special master dismissing her petitioner will result in
a judgment against her and will end all of her rights in the Vaccine Program. Id. Petitioner
understands that she may apply for costs once her case is dismissed and judgment is entered
against her. Id.
Respondent expressly reserves the right to challenge whether petitioner’s claim was timely
filed and to oppose, if appropriate, petitioner’s application for attorneys’ fees and costs. Id. at 2.
Respondent otherwise does not oppose the motion for a dismissal decision. Id.
Finally, petitioner intends to protect her right to file a civil action in the future. Id. Thus,
she intends to elect to reject the Vaccine Program judgment against her and elect to file a civil
action. Id. This matter is now ripe for review.
To receive compensation in the Program, petitioner must establish either (1) a “Table
Injury”—i.e., an injury falling within the Vaccine Injury Table—corresponding to the vaccination,
or (2) that a vaccine listed on the Table was the cause-in-fact of the vaccinee’s injury. See §§
13(a)(1)(A) and 11(c)(1). Under the Vaccine Act, the Program may not award compensation
solely based on a petitioner’s own claims. Rather, a petitioner must support his claim with either
medical records or the opinion of a competent physician. § 13(a)(1).
In the present case, petitioner does not claim and the records does not uncover any
evidence that J.B.A. suffered a “Table Injury.” Neither is there any persuasive evidence that
J.B.A.’s seizure disorder and related injuries were caused by the DTaP vaccination. J.B.A. has a
SCN1A gene mutation. Variants of this mutation have been associated with neurological
conditions such as Dravet Syndrome. While J.B.A. does not have Dravet Syndrome, this
represents a significant obstacle to the claim.
Petitioner claims that the SCN1A gene mutation has not caused J.B.A.’s condition.
Genetic testing indicates that J.B.A. inherited the gene from a parent. Petitioner (J.B.A.’s mother)
indicates that she has the same gene, but she is asymptomatic. Thus, petitioner believes that
another factor – i.e., the vaccination – caused J.B.A.’s condition. In May 2017, I allowed
petitioner additional time to obtain new counsel and to obtain reports from an expert geneticist and
an expert neurologist or immunologist. Petitioner retained new counsel in the same month, but has
not filed any expert reports. After further consideration and discussion with counsel, petitioner has
now filed a motion to dismiss her claim. Thus, petitioner has concluded that she cannot prove a
causal link between the DTaP vaccine and J.B.A.’s condition.
Based on my review of the record, I agree that petitioner will be unable to prove that she is
entitled to compensation in the Vaccine Program. Thus, this case is dismissed for insufficient
proof. The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/ Thomas L. Gowen
Thomas L. Gowen
Special Master
2