VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_17-vv-00978
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_17-vv-00978
Petitioner: George Kennedy
Filed: 2017-07-20
Decided: 2019-09-12
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 
Condition: Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA)
Outcome: dismissed
Award amount USD: 

AI-assisted case summary:
George Kennedy filed a petition for vaccine compensation on July 20, 2017, alleging he developed a Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA) after receiving an influenza vaccine. The record did not contain evidence that Mr. Kennedy suffered a "Table Injury" as defined by the Vaccine Injury Table, nor did it contain persuasive evidence that his alleged injury was vaccine-caused or vaccine-related. To receive compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, a petitioner must prove either a Table Injury or that the injury was actually caused by the vaccine. The Act requires claims to be supported by medical records or the opinion of a competent physician. The public decision does not describe the specific onset of symptoms, medical records, physician's opinion, or treatments. Mr. Kennedy filed a Motion for Dismissal Decision on September 12, 2019, requesting that his case be dismissed. Special Master Mindy Michaels Roth determined that Mr. Kennedy failed to demonstrate entitlement to an award due to insufficient proof and dismissed the case. The decision was issued on September 12, 2019. Petitioner counsel was Randall Knutson, Esq., and respondent counsel was Christine Becer, Esq. The decision is unpublished but will be posted on the Court of Federal Claims' website.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioner George Kennedy filed a petition on July 20, 2017, alleging a Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA) following an influenza vaccine. The case was dismissed on September 12, 2019, by Special Master Mindy Michaels Roth for insufficient proof. Petitioner failed to demonstrate a "Table Injury" or that the injury was "actually caused" by the vaccine, as required by 42 U.S.C. §§ 13(a)(1)(A) and 11(c)(1). The record lacked sufficient medical records or a competent physician's opinion to support the claim. The public decision does not specify the mechanism of injury, named experts, or award details, as the case was dismissed. Petitioner counsel was Randall Knutson, Esq., and respondent counsel was Christine Becer, Esq.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_17-vv-00978-0
Date issued/filed: 2019-10-07
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 9/12/2019) regarding 35 DECISION of Special Master. Signed by Special Master Mindy Michaels Roth. (mw) Service on parties made.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:17-vv-00978-UNJ Document 40 Filed 10/07/19 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 17-978V
Filed: September 12, 2019
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
GEORGE KENNEDY, * UNPUBLISHED
*
Petitioner, *
*
v. * Dismissal; Influenza (“Flu”) Vaccine;
* Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine
SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Administration (“SIRVA”)
AND HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
Respondent. *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Randall Knutson, Esq., Knutson & Casey Law Firm, Mankato, MN, for petitioner.
Christine Becer, Esq., U.S. Dept. of Justice, Washington, DC for respondent.
DECISION1
Roth, Special Master:
On July 20, 2017, petitioner filed a petition for Vaccine Compensation in the National
Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (“the Program”),2 alleging that he developed a Shoulder
Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (“SIRA”) after receiving an influenza (“flu”) vaccine.
The information in the record, however, does not show entitlement to an award under the Program.
On September 12, 2019, petitioner filed a Motion for Dismissal Decision requesting that his case
be dismissed. ECF No. 34.
1 Although this Decision has been formally designated “unpublished,” it will nevertheless be posted on the
Court of Federal Claims’s website, in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-
347, 116 Stat. 2899, 2913 (codified as amended at 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2006)). This means the Decision
will be available to anyone with access to the internet. However, the parties may object to the Decision’s
inclusion of certain kinds of confidential information. Specifically, under Vaccine Rule 18(b), each party
has fourteen days within which to request 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). Otherwise, the whole Decision will be available to the public. Id.
2 The Program comprises 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-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 1:17-vv-00978-UNJ Document 40 Filed 10/07/19 Page 2 of 2
To receive compensation under the Program, petitioner must prove either 1) that he
suffered a “Table Injury” – i.e., an injury falling within the Vaccine Injury Table – corresponding
to his vaccination, or 2) that he suffered an injury that was actually caused by a vaccine. See §§
13(a)(1)(A) and 11(c)(1). An examination of the record did not uncover any evidence that
petitioner suffered a “Table Injury.” Further, the record does not contain persuasive evidence
indicating that petitioner’s alleged injury was vaccine-caused or in any way vaccine-related.
Under the Act, petitioner may not be given a Program award based solely 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 there are insufficient medical records
supporting petitioner’s claim, a medical opinion must be offered in support. Petitioner, however,
has offered no such opinion that supports a finding of entitlement.
Accordingly, it is clear from the record in this case that petitioner has failed to demonstrate
either that he suffered a “Table Injury” or that his injuries were “actually caused” by a vaccination.
Thus, this case is dismissed for insufficient proof. The Clerk shall enter judgment
accordingly.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/ Mindy Michaels Roth
Mindy Michaels Roth
Special Master
2