VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_18-vv-01020
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_18-vv-01020
Petitioner: Jennifer Mann
Filed: 2018-07-16
Decided: 2021-04-27
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 
Condition: Guillain-Barre Syndrome (“GBS”) and Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy (“CIDP”)
Outcome: dismissed
Award amount USD: 

AI-assisted case summary:
Jennifer Mann filed a petition for vaccine compensation on July 16, 2018, alleging that an influenza vaccination caused her to develop Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS) and Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy (CIDP). The Special Master reviewed the record and found insufficient evidence to support her claim for an award under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. To be eligible for compensation, Ms. Mann was required to prove either that she suffered a "Table Injury" listed in the Vaccine Injury Table corresponding to her vaccination, or that her injuries were actually caused by the vaccine. The record did not contain evidence of a Table Injury. Furthermore, the record lacked persuasive evidence indicating that Ms. Mann's alleged injuries were vaccine-caused or vaccine-related. The petition was not supported by sufficient medical records, nor did it include a competent physician's opinion to establish entitlement. Consequently, Ms. Mann failed to demonstrate either a Table Injury or that her injuries were actually caused by a vaccination. On April 1, 2021, Ms. Mann filed a Motion for Dismissal Decision, requesting that her case be dismissed. The case was dismissed for insufficient proof. Howard Gold, Esq., represented the petitioner, and Claudia Gangi, Esq., represented the respondent. The decision was issued by Special Master Mindy Michaels Roth on April 27, 2021.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioner Jennifer Mann alleged that an influenza vaccine caused her to develop Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS) and Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy (CIDP). The Special Master noted that the record did not contain evidence of a "Table Injury" nor persuasive evidence that the alleged injuries were vaccine-caused. The petition lacked the required supporting medical records or a competent physician's opinion to establish entitlement. The case was dismissed for insufficient proof by Special Master Mindy Michaels Roth on April 27, 2021. Petitioner was represented by Howard Gold, Esq., and respondent by Claudia Gangi, Esq. The public decision does not describe the specific vaccine date, age at vaccination, onset of symptoms, specific medical findings, treatments, or expert opinions.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_18-vv-01020-0
Date issued/filed: 2021-04-27
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 4/1/2021) regarding 36 DECISION of Special Master. Signed by Special Master Mindy Michaels Roth. (ec) Service on parties made.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:18-vv-01020-UNJ Document 37 Filed 04/27/21 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 18-1020V
Filed: April 1, 2021
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
JENNIFER MANN, *
* Dismissal; Insufficient Proof;
* Influenza (“Flu”) Vaccine;
Petitioner, * Guillain-Barre Syndrome (“GBS”);
* Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating
v. * Polyneuropathy (“CIDP”).
*
SECRETARY OF HEALTH *
AND HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
Respondent. *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Howard Gold, Esq., Gold Law Firm, LLC, Wellesley Hills, MA, for petitioner.
Claudia Gangi, Esq., U.S. Dept. of Justice, Washington, DC for respondent.
DECISION1
Roth, Special Master:
On July 16, 2018, petitioner filed a petition for Vaccine Compensation in the National
Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (“the Program”),2 alleging that an influenza vaccination
caused her to develop Guillain-Barre Syndrome (“GBS”) and Chronic Inflammatory
Demyelinating Polyneuropathy (“CIDP”). The information in the record, however, does not show
entitlement to an award under the Program. On April 1, 2021, petitioner filed a Motion for
1 Although this Decision has been formally designated “unpublished,” it will nevertheless be posted on the
Court of Federal Claims’ 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 1:18-vv-01020-UNJ Document 37 Filed 04/27/21 Page 2 of 2
Dismissal Decision requesting that her case be dismissed. ECF No. 35.
To receive compensation under the Program, petitioner must prove either 1) that she
suffered a “Table Injury” – i.e., an injury falling within the Vaccine Injury Table – corresponding
to his vaccination, or 2) that she 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 expert 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 she suffered a “Table Injury” or that her 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