VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_18-vv-01702
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_18-vv-01702
Petitioner: Tara Scherner De La Fuente
Filed: 2018-11-02
Decided: 2020-10-22
Vaccine: Tdap
Vaccination date: 
Condition: Parsonage-Turner Syndrome and Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA)
Outcome: dismissed
Award amount USD: 

AI-assisted case summary:
Tara Scherner De La Fuente filed a petition for vaccine compensation on November 2, 2018, alleging that a tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccination caused her to develop Parsonage-Turner Syndrome. Alternatively, she alleged a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA). The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, filed a report arguing that the medical records did not support a Table injury for either condition and that there was insufficient evidence to prove the injuries were vaccine-caused. The Special Master noted that to receive compensation, the petitioner must prove either a "Table Injury" (an injury listed on the Vaccine Injury Table) corresponding to her vaccination or that her injury was actually caused by a vaccine. The public decision does not describe the onset or specific symptoms of the alleged injuries, nor does it mention any medical records or diagnostic tests submitted by the petitioner. The Special Master found no evidence in the record of a "Table Injury." Furthermore, the record lacked persuasive evidence indicating that the alleged injury was vaccine-caused or vaccine-related. The Act requires that a petition be supported by medical records or the opinion of a competent physician, and the petitioner had not offered a competent medical opinion to support her claim. On October 22, 2020, the petitioner filed a Motion to Voluntarily Dismiss, stating she understood a decision dismissing her petition would result in a judgment against her. The Special Master interpreted this as a request for dismissal under Vaccine Rule 21(b), which results in an entry of judgment. The case was dismissed for insufficient proof, as the petitioner failed to demonstrate either a "Table Injury" or that her injuries were "actually caused" by the vaccination. Judgment was to be entered accordingly. The Special Master was Mindy Michaels Roth. Petitioner's counsel was Douglas Burdette, Esq., and respondent's counsel was Alexis Babcock, Esq. The decision was unpublished but posted on the Court of Federal Claims' website.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioner Tara Scherner De La Fuente alleged that a Tdap vaccination caused Parsonage-Turner Syndrome or, alternatively, Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA). The respondent argued that the medical records did not support a Table injury for either condition and that there was insufficient evidence of actual vaccine causation. The Special Master found no evidence of a "Table Injury" and no persuasive evidence that the alleged injuries were vaccine-caused. The petitioner did not offer a competent medical opinion to support her claim, and the public decision does not describe the specific mechanism of injury or any expert testimony. The case was dismissed for insufficient proof on October 22, 2020, by Special Master Mindy Michaels Roth, with judgment to be entered against the petitioner. Petitioner's counsel was Douglas Burdette, Esq., and respondent's counsel was Alexis Babcock, Esq.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_18-vv-01702-0
Date issued/filed: 2020-11-12
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 10/22/2020) regarding 33 DECISION of Special Master. Signed by Special Master Mindy Michaels Roth. (mw) Service on parties made.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:18-vv-01702-UNJ Document 34 Filed 11/12/20 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 18-1702V
Filed: October 22, 2020
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
TARA SCHERNER DE LA FUENTE, * UNPUBLISHED
*
Petitioner, * Dismissal; Insufficient Proof;
* Tetanus-Diphtheria-acellular
v. * Pertussis (“Tdap”) Vaccine;
* Parsonage-Turner Syndrome;
SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Shoulder Injury Related to
AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Vaccine Administration
* (“SIRVA”)
Respondent. *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Douglas Burdette, Esq., Burdette Law, PLLC, North Bend, WA, for petitioner.
Alexis Babcock, Esq., U.S. Dept. of Justice, Washington, DC for respondent.
DECISION1
Roth, Special Master:
On November 2, 2018, petitioner filed a petition for Vaccine Compensation in the National
Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (“the Program”),2 alleging that a tetanus-diphtheria-
acellular pertussis (“Tdap”) vaccination caused her to develop Parsonage-Turner Syndrome.
Petitioner alternatively alleged that she suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccination
(“SIRVA”).
1 Although this Decision has been formally designated “unpublished,” it will nevertheless be posted on the
Court of Federal Claims’s 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-01702-UNJ Document 34 Filed 11/12/20 Page 2 of 2
On February 24, 2020, respondent filed his Rule 4(c) Report (“Resp. Rpt.”). ECF No. 23.
Respondent argued that, based on the medical records submitted, petitioner’s alleged injury does
not meet the criteria for a Table brachial neuritis or a Table SIRVA claim. Resp. Rpt. at 7-9.
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 her 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 opinion must be offered in support. Petitioner, however,
has offered no such opinion that supports a finding of entitlement.
On October 22, 2020 petitioner filed a Motion to Voluntarily Dismiss Pursuant to Rule
21(a). ECF No. 32. In her Motion, petitioner stated that she “understands that a decision by the
Special Master dismissing her petitioner (sic) will result in a judgment against her.” Motion at 1.
A dismissal pursuant to Vaccine Rule 21(a) results in the issuance of an Order to Conclude
Proceedings, which does not result in an entry of judgment. Because petitioner’s Motion
specifically states that she understands that a judgment will be entered against her, petitioner’s
Motion is being interpreted as a request for a dismissal under Vaccine Rule 21(b), which will result
in an entry of judgment.
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