Kimberly Miller v. HHS - Influenza, Guillain-Barré Syndrome (2017)
Case summary [AI summaries can sometimes make mistakes]
Kimberly Miller filed a petition on July 18, 2016, alleging that she suffered injuries, including Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS), caused by a trivalent influenza vaccine she received on October 7, 2014. Petitioner was represented by Robert A.
Tyler of the Tyler Law Firm, and the respondent was the Secretary of Health and Human Services, represented by Ryan D. Pyles of the United States Department of Justice.
On May 9, 2017, Ms. Miller filed a motion to dismiss her petition, stating that an investigation of the facts and available science demonstrated she would be unable to prove entitlement to compensation.
She understood that a dismissal would result in a decision against her but intended to preserve her rights to file a civil action in the future. Special Master Thomas L.
Gowen issued a decision on May 10, 2017. To receive compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, a petitioner must prove either a "Table Injury" listed in the Vaccine Injury Table or that the vaccination actually caused the injury.
The Special Master found no evidence in the record of a "Table Injury." Furthermore, the record lacked persuasive evidence that the October 7, 2014, vaccine caused her alleged injuries. Medical records suggested her symptoms began before the vaccine and were more consistent with a rheumatologic condition like systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) rather than GBS.
Specifically, medical records from November 2014 indicated complaints of bilateral hand pain "going on for [the] last few months," which predated the vaccine, and characterized the pain as "chronic [and] recurring." The decision noted that under the Vaccine Act, claims must be supported by medical records or a competent physician's opinion, neither of which was sufficiently provided in this case. Consequently, the Special Master determined that Ms.
Miller failed to demonstrate entitlement to compensation and dismissed the case for insufficient proof. Judgment was entered accordingly.
Source PDFs
USCOURTS-cofc-1_16-vv-00841