VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_18-vv-00732
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_18-vv-00732
Petitioner: Charles Williams
Filed: 2018-05-23
Decided: 2021-09-14
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 
Condition: shoulder injury related to vaccine administration
Outcome: dismissed
Award amount USD: 

AI-assisted case summary:
Charles Williams filed a petition on May 23, 2018, alleging that an influenza vaccine caused him to suffer a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA). The Secretary of Health and Human Services disputed the claim. During the litigation, Mr. Williams passed away on May 3, 2020. His attorney, Amy Senerth of Muller Brazil, LLP, stated during a December 17, 2020 status conference that she was unable to communicate with Mr. Williams and had found an obituary for him. A death certificate was filed on March 9, 2021, confirming his passing on May 3, 2020. The Special Master, Christian J. Moran, directed Ms. Senerth to file a motion to substitute a proper party to represent the estate by June 21, 2021, citing Christner v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 145 Fed. Cl. 633 (2019). Ms. Senerth reported on June 22, 2021, that she was unsuccessful in identifying anyone willing to pursue the action on behalf of Mr. Williams' estate. As no proper petitioner could be substituted within the time permitted by Rule 25 of the Rules of the Court of Federal Claims, the case was dismissed for lack of a proper party to maintain the action. Mallori Browne Openchowski represented the respondent. The decision was issued on September 14, 2021.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioner Charles Williams alleged that an influenza vaccine caused a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA). The public decision does not describe the specific vaccine date, onset of symptoms, medical records, diagnostic tests, treatments, or the mechanism of injury. The case was dismissed because the petitioner, Charles Williams, passed away on May 3, 2020, and his counsel, Amy Senerth, was unable to identify or substitute a proper party to maintain the action within the time permitted by Court of Federal Claims Rule 25. No award was made. Special Master Christian J. Moran issued the decision on September 14, 2021. Petitioner was represented by Amy Senerth, and respondent was represented by Mallori Browne Openchowski.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_18-vv-00732-0
Date issued/filed: 2021-09-14
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 08/18/2021) regarding 80 DECISION of Special Master. Signed by Special Master Christian J. Moran. (hh) Service on parties made.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:18-vv-00732-UNJ Document 84 Filed 09/14/21 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
CHARLES WILLIAMS, *
* No. 18-732V
Petitioner, * Special Master Christian J. Moran
*
v. *
* Filed: August 18, 2021
SECRETARY OF HEALTH *
AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Court of Fed. Claims Rule 25;
* Death of petitioner; Decision
Respondent. * dismissing case.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Amy A. Senerth, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA, counsel of record for petitioner;
Mallori Browne Openchowski, United States Dep’t of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
UNPUBLISHED DECISION DENYING COMPENSATION1
Represented by Attorney Amy Senerth, Charles Williams asserted that an influenza
vaccine caused him to suffer a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration. Pet., filed May
23, 2018. The Secretary disputed this claim. Resp’t’s Rep., filed Sept. 3, 2019. The case must
be dismissed due to the lack of a proper petitioner to maintain the action.
I. Procedural History
Petitioner submitted medical records and, on March 24, 2020, filed an expert report. The
Secretary responded with an expert report. During the process of obtaining additional expert
reports, the undersigned directed petitioner to submit an affidavit describing the extent of his
damages. Order, issued Apr. 28, 2020.
1 The E-Government Act, 44 § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of
Electronic Government Services), requires that the Court post this decision on its website
(https://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/aggregator/sources/7). Once posted, anyone can access this
decision via the internet. Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 18(b), the parties have 14 days to file a
motion proposing redaction of medical information or other information described in 42 U.S.C.
§ 300aa-12(d)(4). Any redactions ordered by the special master will be reflected in the
document posted on the website.

Case 1:18-vv-00732-UNJ Document 84 Filed 09/14/21 Page 2 of 2
Petitioner received multiple enlargements of time to file this affidavit. Eventually, in a
December 17, 2020 status conference, Ms. Senerth stated that she was no longer able to
communicate with Mr. Williams. She also indicated that she found an obituary for him and had
tried unsuccessfully to reach his emergency contact.
Ms. Senerth filed a death certificate on March 9, 2021. It indicated that Mr. Williams had
passed away on May 3, 2020. Thereafter, Ms. Senerth was directed to file a motion to substitute
by June 21, 2021. Order, issued Mar. 23, 2021 (citing Christner v. Sec’y of Health & Human
Servs., 145 Fed. Cl. 633 (2019)).
Ms. Senerth attempted to identify any person who might want to pursue this action on
behalf of the estate of Mr. Williams. However, she did not succeed. Pet’r’s Status Rep., filed
June 22, 2021.
II. Legal Standard
The Vaccine Rules do not address the consequences of the death of the petitioner. Thus,
in absence of any specific direction, the Rules of the Court of Federal Claims (RCFC) are
consulted. See Vaccine Rule 1(c).
Rule 25 of the RCFC contains two aspects. First, Rule 25 explains the procedure that may
be followed. “If a party dies and the claim is not extinguished, the court may order substitution
of the proper party. A motion for substitution may be made by any party or by the decedent’s
successor or representative.” Second, if the procedure is not followed, Rule 25 sets forth the
consequences. “If the motion is not made within 90 days after service of a statement noting
death, the action must be dismissed.”
III. Discussion
Mr. Williams’s petition must be dismissed due to the lack of a proper petitioner to
maintain the action. Mr. Williams cannot act as the petitioner because he has died. No one has
come forward to substitute for Mr. Williams within the time permitted by Rule 25. Thus, the
action must be dismissed.
IV. Conclusion
For the foregoing reason, this case is dismissed. The Clerk shall enter judgement
accordingly.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Christian J. Moran
Christian J. Moran
Special Master
2