VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_16-vv-01720
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_16-vv-01720
Petitioner: Andrea Owens-Bachmann
Filed: 2016-12-30
Decided: 2017-10-16
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 2013-10-09
Condition: Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy (CIDP)
Outcome: dismissed
Award amount USD: 

AI-assisted case summary:
Andrea Owens-Bachmann filed a petition on December 30, 2016, alleging that she developed Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy (CIDP) as a result of an influenza vaccine received on October 9, 2013. The petitioner later filed a motion to dismiss her own case, stating that an investigation of the facts and available science demonstrated she would be unable to prove entitlement to compensation. The court noted that the record did not contain persuasive evidence that the injury was caused by the vaccine, as the onset date was too far removed from the vaccination for a sufficient cause-in-fact analysis. Furthermore, the petitioner failed to provide an expert report to support her claim, and the medical records were insufficient to establish entitlement. Consequently, the case was dismissed for insufficient proof on May 18, 2017. Subsequently, on October 16, 2017, the parties filed a stipulation for attorneys' fees and costs, agreeing to an award of $4,000, payable jointly to the petitioner and her counsel, to settle all legal expenses incurred in the matter.

Theory of causation field:
unclear

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_16-vv-01720-0
Date issued/filed: 2017-06-29
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 05/18/2017) regarding 13 DECISION of Special Master (Signed by Special Master Thomas L. Gowen.)(mpj) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:16-vv-01720-UNJ Document 16 Filed 06/29/17 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
Filed: May 18, 2017
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
ANDEA OWENS-BACHMANN, * UNPUBLISHED
*
Petitioner, * No. 16-1720V
*
v. * Special Master Gowen
*
SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Petitioner’s Motion for Dismissal;
AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Influenza (“Flu”) Vaccination;
* Chronic Inflammatory
Respondent. * Demyelinating Polyneuropathy
* * * * * * * * * * * * * (CIDP)
Danielle Strait, Maglio Christopher and Toale (WA), Seattle, WA, for petitioner.
Ryan Pyles, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC for respondent.
DECISION1
On December 30, 2016, Andrea Owens-Bachmann (“petitioner”) filed a petition pursuant
to the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.2 Petitioner alleged that she suffered
from Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy (“CIDP”) as a result of an influenza
(“flu”) vaccine received on October 9, 2013. Petition at 1-2.
On May 16, 2017, petitioner filed a motion for a decision dismissing her petition.
Petitioner’s Motion (ECF No. 12). The motion provided that “[a]n investigation of the facts and
available science supporting her case has demonstrated to Petitioner that she will be unable to
prove that she is entitled to compensation in the Vaccine Program.” Petitioner’s Motion at ¶ 1.
Petitioner understands that a decision by the special master dismissing her petitioner will result
in a judgment against her, which will end all her rights in the Vaccine Program. Id. at ¶ 3.
Petitioner intends to protect her rights to file a civil action in the future. Id. at ¶ 5.
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.

Case 1:16-vv-01720-UNJ Document 16 Filed 06/29/17 Page 2 of 2
To receive compensation under the Program, petitioner must prove either (1) that she
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 the vaccination.
See §§ 13(a)(1)(A) and 11(c)(1). An examination of the records did not uncover any evidence
that petitioner suffered a “Table Injury.” Further, the record does not contain any persuasive
evidence indicating that petitioner’s injury was caused by the flu vaccine she received on
October 9, 2013. As the undersigned noted during the initial status conference, even the most
liberal reading of the medical records would set the onset date of petitioner’s injuries more than
110 days after she received the influenza vaccination on October 9, 2013, which is too far
removed in time for a sufficient cause-in-fact analysis.
Under the Vaccine Act, petitioner may not be given a Program award based on the
petitioner’s 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 the medical records are
insufficient to establish entitlement to compensation, a medical opinion must be offered in
support. However, petitioners have not filed an expert report.
Accordingly, it is clear from the record in this case that petitioner has failed to
demonstrate either that she suffered a “Table Injury” or that the injuries were “actually caused”
by the October 9, 2013, flu vaccine. 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

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 2: USCOURTS-cofc-1_16-vv-01720-1
Date issued/filed: 2017-10-16
Pages: 4
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 09/18/2017) regarding 19 DECISION Fees Stipulation/Proffer, ( Signed by Special Master Thomas L. Gowen. )(mpj) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:16-vv-01720-UNJ Document 22 Filed 10/16/17 Page 1 of 4
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 16-1720V
Filed: September 18, 2017
UNPUBLISHED
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
ANDREA OWENS-BACHMANN, *
*
Petitioner, *
v. *
* Attorneys’ Fees and Costs;
SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Stipulation
AND HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
Respondent. *
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Danielle A. Strait, Maglio Christopher & Toale, Seattle, WA, for petitioner.
Ryan D. Pyles, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
DECISION ON ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS1
On December 30, 2016, petitioner filed a petition for compensation under the National
Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq.,2 (the “Vaccine Act”).
Petitioner alleged that she suffered from Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy
(“CIDP”) as a result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccine she received on October 9, 2013. On May
18, 2017, the undersigned issued a decision dismissing petitioner’s claim for insufficient proof.
On September 12, 2017, the parties filed a Stipulation Concerning Attorneys’ Fees and
Costs. According to the stipulation, attached herein as Appendix A, the parties stipulate to an
award of $4,000. In compliance with General Order #9, petitioner has filed a signed statement
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 National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program is set forth in Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine
Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755, codified as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 to -34 (2012)
(Vaccine Act or the Act). All citations in this decision to individual sections of the Vaccine Act are to 42 U.S.C.A. §
300aa.

Case 1:16-vv-01720-UNJ Document 22 Filed 10/16/17 Page 2 of 4
indicating that she incurred no out-of-pocket expenses related to the litigation of this matter.
Respondent states that this stipulation “does not represent an agreement by respondent to the
hourly rates of the professionals who worked on this matter, nor a waiver of any objections that
respondent may raise in any other case.” Stipulation at ¶6.
The Vaccine Act permits an award of reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs. § 15(e).
Based on the reasonableness of petitioner’s request and the lack of any objection by respondent,
the undersigned GRANTS the request for approval and payment of attorneys’ fees and costs.
Accordingly, the undersigned awards the total of $4,0003 as follows:
 A lump sum of $4,000, representing reimbursement for attorneys’ fees and
costs, in the form of a check payable jointly to petitioner and petitioner’s
counsel, Danielle Strait, of Maglio Christopher & Toale.
The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment in accordance herewith.4
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/Thomas L. Gowen
Thomas L. Gowen
Special Master
3 This amount is intended to cover all legal expenses incurred in this matter. This award encompasses all charges by
the attorney against a client, “advanced costs” as well as fees for legal services rendered. Furthermore, § 15(e)(3)
prevents an attorney from charging or collecting fees (including costs) that would be in addition to the amount
awarded herein. See generally Beck v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 924 F.2d 1029 (Fed. Cir.1991).
4 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment can be expedited by the parties’ joint filing of notice
renouncing the right to seek review.
2

Case 1:16-vv-01720-UNJ Document 22 Filed 10/16/17 Page 3 of 4
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
ANDREA OWENS-BACHMANN,
Petitioner,
v. No. 16-1720V
Special Master Gowen
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND ECF
HUMAN SERVICES,
Respondent.
STIPULATION CONCERNING
FINAL ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS
It is hereby stipulated by and between the parties, the following matters:
1. Judgment entered in this case on June 21, 2017, following the special master’s
dismissal decision issued May 18, 2017.
2. Petitioner forwarded a draft Application for Award of Attorneys’ Fees and
Reimbursement of Costs (Application) to respondent.
3. Respondent raised objections to certain aspects of petitioner’s Application, including
the legal prerequisites to an award of attorneys’ fees and costs.
4. Maintaining their respective positions as to petitioner’s entitlement to attorneys’ fees
and costs, the parties nevertheless now agree that the issues between them shall be settled and
that a decision should be entered awarding attorneys’ fees and costs described in paragraph 7 of
this Stipulation.
5. Pursuant to General Order #9, petitioner represents that she advanced no reimbursable
costs in pursuit of her claim.
6. This Stipulation does not represent an agreement by respondent to the hourly rates
of the professionals who worked on this matter, nor a waiver of any objections that respondent
may raise in any other case.
7. The parties now request that a decision awarding final attorneys’ fees and costs,
totaling $4,000.00, payable jointly to petitioner and petitioner’s counsel, be issued.
1

Case 1:16-vv-01720-UNJ Document 22 Filed 10/16/17 Page 4 of 4
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ DANIELLE A. STRAIT s/ RYAN D. PYLES
DANIELLE A. STRAIT, ESQ. RYAN D. PYLES
MAGLIO CHRISTOPHER & TOALE, PA Trial Attorney
The Columbia Center Torts Branch, Civil Division
701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3505 U.S. Department of Justice
Seattle, WA 98104 P.O. Box 146, Ben Franklin Station
Tel: 888.952.5242/ Fax 877.952.5042 Washington, D.C. 20044-0146
Tel: (202) 616-9847
DATED: September 12, 2017
2