J.J.N. v. HHS - DTaP, autism spectrum disorder (ASD) (2019)

Filed 2017-10-03Decided 2019-07-18Vaccine DTaP
dismissedcognitive/developmental

Case summary [AI summaries can sometimes make mistakes]

On October 3, 2017, Keith Noe and Carol Langley filed a petition on behalf of their minor son, J.J.N., seeking compensation under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Program. They alleged that childhood vaccines administered on September 24, 2014, and November 25, 2014, caused J.J.N. to suffer from seizures, aphasia, developmental delays, and encephalopathy.

An amended petition also alleged harm from a vaccine administered on January 6, 2018. Medical records indicated J.J.N. was diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD).

The case was initially assigned to Special Master Gowen and later transferred to Special Master Brian H. Corcoran.

Respondent moved to dismiss, arguing insufficient proof and that autism claims have historically failed. Petitioners opposed, alleging their son's symptoms were precipitated by an encephalopathy, exacerbated by vaccinations, and that his eczema indicated an autoimmune intolerance.

Special Master Corcoran dismissed the case on February 4, 2019, finding insufficient evidence to establish a Table injury for encephalopathy or a non-Table claim for vaccine causation of ASD symptoms. He noted that contemporaneous medical records are given more weight than petitioners' recollections and that temporal association alone is insufficient.

The court, in a decision reissued for publication on July 18, 2019, reviewed Special Master Corcoran's decision. The court affirmed the dismissal, finding that the petitioners failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that J.J.N.'s alleged encephalopathy or other symptoms, including features of autism spectrum disorder, were caused by the vaccinations.

The court also noted that new theories and evidence submitted with the motion for review were not properly before the court. The court found that the Special Master had rationally concluded that the petitioners' exhibits and personal recollections did not overcome the presumption in favor of the information contained in the contemporaneous medical record.

The court affirmed the Special Master's decision, stating that petitioners had not offered sufficient proof that J.J.N.'s alleged encephalopathy or other alleged symptoms were caused by the vaccinations he received. Petitioners were represented by Keith Noe and Carol Langley (pro se), and respondent was represented by Voris E.

Johnson in the Special Master's decision and by Lara A. Englund, Heather L.

Pearlman, Catharine E. Reeves, C.

Salvatore D'Alessio, and Joseph H. Hunt in the court's decision.

Special Master Corcoran issued the initial dismissal, and Judge Marian Blank Horn issued the court's opinion affirming the dismissal.

Theory of causation

Petitioners alleged that J.J.N. suffered from seizures, aphasia, developmental delays, and encephalopathy, and was diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), allegedly caused by DTaP and MMR vaccinations received on September 24, 2014, and November 25, 2014. They also alleged harm from a January 6, 2018 vaccine. Petitioners argued for a Table injury of acute encephalopathy and a non-Table claim for vaccine causation of ASD symptoms, suggesting an autoimmune intolerance due to eczema. Respondent argued insufficient proof and historical failure of autism claims. Special Master Corcoran dismissed the petition, finding no evidence of a Table encephalopathy and insufficient proof for a non-Table claim, emphasizing the weight of contemporaneous medical records over recollections and noting that temporal association alone is insufficient. The Court of Federal Claims affirmed the dismissal, agreeing that petitioners failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the alleged injuries were vaccine-caused. The court found that new theories and evidence submitted with the motion for review were not properly before the court. The decision was issued by Special Master Brian H. Corcoran and affirmed by Judge Marian Blank Horn. Petitioners were pro se, and respondent was represented by counsel. The case was dismissed for insufficient proof.

Source PDFs 2 total · 2 downloaded