Jonathan Zins v. HHS - Influenza, in utero injuries resulting in stillbirth (2019)
Case summary [AI summaries can sometimes make mistakes]
Sarah and Leib Zins filed a petition on December 17, 2018, on behalf of their unborn child, Jonathan Zins, alleging that an influenza vaccine administered to Sarah Zins on December 12, 2016, caused in utero injuries resulting in Jonathan's stillbirth. The petitioners intended to file two separate petitions: one for Sarah Zins for her own alleged injuries and another for Jonathan Zins for his death.
Respondent moved to dismiss Jonathan Zins' petition, asserting that the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act does not provide a cause of action for children who were not born alive. The Special Master agreed with the respondent, citing the statutory definition of "child" as an individual "born alive." As Jonathan Zins was stillborn, his claim was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
The Special Master noted that Sarah Zins could pursue her own claim for injuries she suffered as a result of the vaccination and instructed the Clerk of the Court to docket a separate petition for her. This decision specifically addresses the dismissal of Jonathan Zins' petition.
The public decision does not describe the specific onset of symptoms, medical tests, treatments, or expert witnesses. The Special Master was Christian J.
Moran. The attorneys involved are not named in the public text.
Theory of causation
Petitioners Sarah and Leib Zins alleged that an influenza vaccine administered to Sarah Zins on December 12, 2016, caused in utero injuries to their unborn child, Jonathan Zins, resulting in his stillbirth. Respondent moved to dismiss the petition on behalf of Jonathan Zins, arguing that the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act does not grant jurisdiction for claims brought on behalf of a child not born alive. The Special Master, Christian J. Moran, granted the motion, citing the 21st Century Cures Act, which defines "child" as an individual "born alive." As Jonathan Zins was stillborn, the petition was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The public text does not detail the specific mechanism of injury, expert testimony, or the outcome of any potential claim by Sarah Zins. The decision date was August 6, 2019.
Source PDFs
USCOURTS-cofc-1_18-vv-01934