VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-01338
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-01338
Petitioner: S.W.
Filed: 2015-11-06
Decided: 2016-07-18
Vaccine: Gardasil
Vaccination date: 2012-05-17
Condition: severe adverse reaction
Outcome: dismissed
Award amount USD: 

AI-assisted case summary:
On November 6, 2015, Jeff Weggen and Beth Qualls filed a petition on behalf of their minor child, S.W., alleging that Gardasil vaccinations, with the last dose administered on May 17, 2012, caused a severe adverse reaction. The petitioners were represented by Andrew D. Downing of Van Cott & Talamante, PLLC. The respondent was represented by Anne D. Martin of the United States Department of Justice. On July 15, 2016, the petitioners moved for a decision dismissing their petition, stating they recognized they would likely be unable to meet their burden of proof regarding scientific and medical causation and establish S.W.'s entitlement to compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. They understood that this dismissal would result in a judgment against them and end S.W.'s rights under the program. The Special Master noted that to receive compensation, petitioners must prove either a Table Injury or that the vaccination actually caused the injury. The public decision does not describe the specific severe adverse reaction alleged, nor does it contain evidence of a Table Injury. The record also did not provide persuasive evidence that the Gardasil vaccines caused S.W.'s alleged injuries. The decision emphasized that claims must be supported by medical records or a physician's opinion, neither of which was sufficiently provided in the record. Consequently, Special Master Thomas L. Gowen dismissed the case for insufficient proof, and the Clerk was ordered to enter judgment accordingly. The public decision does not detail the specific clinical story, onset, symptoms, tests, treatments, or expert names.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioners Jeff Weggen and Beth Qualls filed on behalf of minor child S.W. alleging a severe adverse reaction from Gardasil vaccinations, with the last dose on May 17, 2012. Petitioners later moved to dismiss, stating they could not prove scientific and medical causation. The Special Master found no evidence of a Table Injury and insufficient persuasive evidence that the Gardasil vaccines actually caused S.W.'s alleged injuries. The record lacked supporting medical records or a physician's opinion. The case was dismissed for insufficient proof by Special Master Thomas L. Gowen on July 18, 2016. Attorneys for petitioners were Andrew D. Downing and for respondent Anne D. Martin. No award was made.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-01338-0
Date issued/filed: 2016-08-08
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 07/18/2016) regarding 22 DECISION of Special Master ( Signed by Special Master Thomas L. Gowen.)(mpj) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:15-vv-01338-UNJ Document 26 Filed 08/08/16 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 15-1338V
Filed: July 18, 2016
[Not to be published]
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
JEFF WEGGEN and BETH QUALLS *
on behalf of their minor child S.W., * Special Master Gowen
*
Petitioners, * Dismissal; Gardasil;
v. * Adverse Reaction
*
*
SECRETARY OF HEALTH *
AND HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
Respondent. *
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
Andrew D. Downing, Van Cott & Talamante, PLLC, Phoenix, AZ, for petitioners.
Anne D. Martin, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC for respondent.
DECISION1
On November 6, 2015, Jeff Weggen and Beth Qualls (“petitioners”) filed a petition on
behalf of their minor child, S.W., pursuant to the National Vaccine Injury Compensation
Program.2 Petitioners alleged that as a result of receiving Gardasil vaccinations, the last in the
series administered May 17, 2012, S.W. suffered a “severe adverse reaction.” Petition at
Preamble. The information in the record, however, does not show entitlement to an award under
the Program.
On July 15, 2016, petitioners moved for a decision dismissing their petition, stating that
“[p]etitioners recognize that they will likely be unable to meet their burden of proof as to
scientific and medical causation and establish that S.W. is entitled to compensation in the
1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the
undersigned intends to post this decision on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, in
accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002, 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and
Promotion of Electronic Government Services). In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), petitioner has 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, 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-01338-UNJ Document 26 Filed 08/08/16 Page 2 of 2
Vaccine Program.” Motion for a Decision Dismissing Petition at ¶ 3, filed July 15, 2016.
Petitioners state that they understand that a decision by the Special Master will result in a
judgment against them, and that such a judgment will end all of S.W.’s rights in the Vaccine
Program. Id. at ¶ 5. Petitioners state that they intend to protect their and S.W.’s rights to file a
civil action. Id. at ¶ 6. Respondent does not oppose petitioner’s motion.
To receive compensation under the Program, petitioners must prove either (1) that S.W.
suffered a “Table Injury”—i.e., an injury falling within the Vaccine Injury Table—corresponding
to the vaccination, or (2) that S.W. suffered an injury that was actually caused by the vaccination.
See §§ 13(a)(1)(A) and 11(c)(1). An examination of the record did not uncover any evidence
that S.W. suffered a “Table Injury,” nor do petitioners allege that S.W. suffered a “Table Injury.”
Further, the record does not contain any persuasive evidence indicating that S.W.’s alleged
injuries were caused by the Gardasil vaccines.
Under the Vaccine Act, petitioner may not be given a Program award based solely on the
petitioners’ 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.
Accordingly, it is clear from the record in this case that petitioner has failed to
demonstrate either that S.W. suffered a “Table Injury” or that the injuries were “actually caused”
by the Gardasil vaccinations. Thus, this case is dismissed for insufficient proof. The Clerk
shall enter judgment accordingly.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/ Thomas L. Gowen
Thomas L. Gowen
Special Master
2