K.L. v. HHS - Tdap, shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) (2023)
Case summary [AI summaries can sometimes make mistakes]
On November 1, 2017, K.L. filed a petition under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program alleging she developed a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) after receiving a tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccination on November 14, 2014. The petition was filed by Ronald Homer, Esq. of Conway Homer, P.C.
The respondent was the Secretary of Health and Human Services, represented by Alec Saxe, Esq. of the U.S. Department of Justice.
Special Master Mindy Michaels Roth presided over the case. The public decision states that the information in the record did not demonstrate entitlement to an award under the Program.
Specifically, the record did not contain evidence of a "Table Injury" as defined by the Vaccine Injury Table, nor did it contain persuasive evidence that the alleged injury was actually caused by the vaccine. The decision noted that a petition cannot be granted based solely on the petitioner's claims; it must be supported by medical records or the opinion of a competent physician.
In this case, insufficient medical records were provided, and no medical opinion supporting a finding of entitlement was offered. Consequently, K.L. failed to demonstrate entitlement to compensation.
On March 30, 2023, the petitioner filed a Motion for Dismissal Decision. The case was dismissed for insufficient proof, and judgment was to be entered accordingly.
The decision was issued on April 26, 2023, and designated as unpublished but posted on the Court of Federal Claims' website.
Theory of causation
Petitioner K.L. filed a petition on November 1, 2017, alleging a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) after a Tdap vaccination on November 14, 2014. The Special Master found that the record did not contain evidence of a "Table Injury" or persuasive evidence that the alleged injury was vaccine-caused. The petition could not be granted based solely on petitioner's claims, requiring support from medical records or a competent physician's opinion, neither of which was sufficiently provided. The case was dismissed for insufficient proof on April 26, 2023, by Special Master Mindy Michaels Roth. Petitioner's counsel was Ronald Homer, Esq., and respondent's counsel was Alec Saxe, Esq. The public decision does not describe the specific mechanism of injury, expert testimony, or a detailed clinical story.