A.K. v. HHS - MMR, gastrointestinal problems, including celiac disease/immune system disorder, as well as some type of regressive expressive language disorder (2017)

On February 26, 2016, James Kerrigan and Rosanna LePore, parents of the minor A.K., filed a petition seeking compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. They alleged that the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine A.K. received on March 18, 2013, caused her to develop gastrointestinal problems, including celiac disease/immune system disorder, and a regressive expressive language disorder.

The petition also mentioned an underlying metabolic disorder. After Petitioners filed medical records and the parties filed a joint status report and statement of completion, Respondent filed a report contesting entitlement.

Respondent noted that Petitioners had failed to identify a defined injury. During a telephonic status conference on September 15, 2016, Special Master Brian H.

Corcoran informed Petitioners that their claim was similar to other autism/developmental regression claims that had been found without merit and that the lack of contemporaneous medical evidence supporting the claim significantly diminished their likelihood of success. Petitioners subsequently filed an unopposed motion on September 27, 2016, requesting a dismissal of their claim, stating that further investigation demonstrated they would be unable to prove entitlement to compensation.

Petitioners also stated their intent to reject the Vaccine Program judgment to file a civil action. Respondent did not object.

Special Master Corcoran noted that the record lacked evidence of a "Table Injury" and contained no persuasive evidence, such as a medical expert's opinion, indicating that the alleged injury could have been caused or significantly aggravated by the vaccine. The public decision does not describe the onset of symptoms, specific medical tests performed, or treatments received.

The public decision does not name petitioner counsel or respondent counsel. The case was dismissed for insufficient proof, and the Clerk was ordered to enter judgment accordingly.