A.R.K. v. HHS - Pentacel, Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) (2019)

Oksana Motuzyuk, on behalf of her minor son A.R.K., filed a petition on February 14, 2019, alleging that a Pentacel vaccine administered on April 29, 2015, caused A.R.K. to develop Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). A.R.K. was approximately 15 months old at the time of vaccination.

Petitioner claimed that A.R.K. developed a high fever and other signs of distress later on the day of vaccination, and by the next day was unresponsive and detached. Medical records from approximately one week later, on May 7, 2015, noted speech delay and questionable eye contact, with a suspicion of viral illness.

Subsequent evaluations confirmed a diagnosis of ASD, with some records noting possible regression around fifteen months of age, close to the vaccination date. The respondent moved to dismiss the petition, arguing that the evidence did not support a vaccine-induced injury.

Special Master Brian H. Corcoran reviewed the medical records, which indicated A.R.K. had normal developmental assessments prior to vaccination.

Following vaccination, A.R.K. reportedly experienced a fever and behavioral changes, leading to an emergency department visit where a viral illness was suspected, alongside speech delay and questionable eye contact. Subsequent evaluations confirmed ASD, though some records noted possible regression around the time of vaccination, while others did not confirm a consistent trend of regression.

The Special Master found that the medical records did not establish that A.R.K. suffered an acute encephalopathy within 72 hours of vaccination, as he did not experience a significantly decreased level of consciousness warranting hospitalization. The Special Master also found no evidence of a chronic encephalopathy.

The court noted that the claim was not styled as a Table injury and that numerous prior cases have established that vaccines do not cause autism. The Special Master agreed with the respondent, finding that the evidence of A.R.K.'s developmental symptoms manifesting after vaccination was insufficient to prove causation, especially in light of the extensive precedent rejecting vaccine-autism claims.

The petition was dismissed, concluding that it lacked a reasonable basis and would not succeed where countless similar claims had failed. Petitioner was represented by Yuri Jelokov of Farrish Johnson Law Office, and respondent was represented by Voris E.

Johnson of the U.S. Department of Justice.