John Seidel v. HHS - Influenza, chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (“CIDP”) (2021)
Case summary [AI summaries can sometimes make mistakes]
John Seidel filed a petition on November 8, 2018, alleging that the influenza vaccine he received on November 16, 2015, caused him to develop chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP). Mr.
Seidel further alleged that he suffered residual effects from this injury for more than six months. The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, denied that the vaccine caused or significantly aggravated the petitioner's alleged injury or any other injury, and denied that Mr.
Seidel's current disabilities were the result of a vaccine-related injury. Despite these denials, the parties reached a joint stipulation, which was filed on March 16, 2021.
Special Master Christian J. Moran reviewed the stipulation and found it reasonable, adopting it as the decision of the Court.
The stipulation awarded Mr. Seidel a lump sum payment of $94,107.72, payable by check to the petitioner.
This amount is intended to compensate for all damages available under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a), including pain and suffering and unreimbursed medical expenses. The public decision does not describe the specific onset of symptoms, clinical details, diagnostic tests, treatments, or expert witnesses.
The case was resolved via this stipulation and award.
Theory of causation
Petitioner John Seidel alleged that the influenza vaccine administered on November 16, 2015, caused him to develop chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP), a condition listed in the Vaccine Injury Table. He claimed residual effects lasting more than six months. Respondent denied causation. The parties reached a stipulation, adopted by Special Master Christian J. Moran on March 16, 2021, awarding petitioner $94,107.72 as a lump sum for all damages, including pain and suffering and unreimbursed medical expenses. The public decision does not detail the specific mechanism of injury, expert testimony, or competing medical theories. Attorneys involved were Jeffrey S. Pop for Petitioner and Laurie Wiesner for Respondent. The case was resolved via stipulation.
Source PDFs
USCOURTS-cofc-1_18-vv-01743