VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_19-vv-00204
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_19-vv-00204
Petitioner: Garland Rucker
Filed: 2019-02-05
Decided: 2020-11-24
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 2016-10-18
Condition: transverse myelitis
Outcome: dismissed
Award amount USD: 

AI-assisted case summary:
Garland Rucker filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program on February 5, 2019, alleging he suffered transverse myelitis after receiving an influenza vaccine on October 18, 2016. The Special Master, Nora Beth Dorsey, previously issued a ruling on September 30, 2020, finding that Mr. Rucker's symptoms of numbness began in September 2016, which was prior to his vaccination date. Based on this factual finding, Mr. Rucker subsequently filed a motion on October 30, 2020, requesting that his case be dismissed. He stated that an investigation of the facts and science supporting his case demonstrated he would be unable to prove entitlement to compensation and that further proceedings would be unreasonable and a waste of resources for the Court, the respondent, and the Vaccine Program. Mr. Rucker acknowledged that a decision by the Special Master would result in a judgment against him and that this judgment would terminate all of his rights under the Vaccine Act. The Special Master reviewed the record and Mr. Rucker's motion. To receive compensation, a petitioner must prove either a "Table Injury" or that the injury was actually caused by the vaccination. The public decision does not describe the specific clinical story, expert testimony, or the mechanism of injury. The Special Master found that Mr. Rucker did not meet the statutory requirements for compensation, referencing the Federal Circuit's explanation that eligibility requirements are threshold criteria. Consequently, the Special Master dismissed the case and ordered that judgment be entered against Mr. Rucker. The case was dismissed on November 24, 2020. Petitioner's counsel was Lawrence Gene Michel of Kennedy, Berkley, et al. Respondent's counsel was Althea W. Davis of the U.S. Department of Justice. The Special Master was Nora Beth Dorsey.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioner Garland Rucker alleged transverse myelitis following an October 18, 2016, influenza vaccination. The Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey previously ruled that petitioner's symptoms of numbness began in September 2016, prior to the vaccination. Based on this ruling, petitioner moved to dismiss his case, stating he could not prove entitlement to compensation. The Special Master found petitioner did not meet statutory requirements for compensation, referencing Black v. Sec'y of Health & Hum. Servs., 93 F.3d 781 (Fed. Cir. 1996), which established eligibility requirements as threshold criteria. The public decision does not detail the specific theory of causation, expert testimony, or mechanism of injury. The case was dismissed on November 24, 2020, with judgment entered against petitioner. Petitioner's counsel was Lawrence Gene Michel; respondent's counsel was Althea W. Davis.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_19-vv-00204-1
Date issued/filed: 2020-11-24
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 10/30/2020) regarding 58 DECISION of Special Master. Signed by Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey. (mjf) Service on parties made.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:19-vv-00204-UNJ Document 61 Filed 11/24/20 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
Filed: October 30, 2020
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
GARLAND RUCKER, * PUBLISHED
*
Petitioner, * No. 19-204V
*
v. * Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey
*
SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Petitioner’s Motion for a Decision
AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Dismissing His Petition; Influenza (“Flu”)
* Vaccine; Transverse Myelitis (“TM”).
Respondent. *
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Lawrence Gene Michel, Kennedy, Berkley, et al., Salina, KS, for petitioner.
Althea W. Davis, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
DECISION1
On February 5, 2019, Garland Rucker (“petitioner”) filed a petition for compensation
under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (“Vaccine Program”)2 alleging that he
suffered transverse myelitis (“TM”) after receiving an October 18, 2016 influenza (“flu”)
vaccination. Petition at Preamble (ECF No. 1). On September 30, 2020, the undersigned issued
a ruling finding onset of petitioner’s numbness from his abdomen to his legs began in September
2016, before the flu vaccine administered to him on October 18, 2016. Fact Ruling dated Sept.
30, 2020 (ECF No. 54).
1 Because this Decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the
undersigned is required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims’ website in
accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal
Management and Promotion of Electronic Government Services). This means the Decision will
be available to anyone with access to the Internet. In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b),
petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to redact medical or other information, the disclosure
of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, the undersigned
agrees that the identified material fits within this definition, the undersigned will redact such
material from public access.
2 The Program comprises Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, 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.
1

Case 1:19-vv-00204-UNJ Document 61 Filed 11/24/20 Page 2 of 2
On October 30, 2020, petitioner moved for a decision dismissing his case, stating that
“[a]n investigation of the facts and science supporting his case has demonstrated to petitioner
that he will be unable to prove that he is entitled to compensation in the Vaccine Program” and
“to proceed further would be unreasonable and would waste the resources of the Court, the
respondent, and the Vaccine Program.” Petitioner’s Motion for a Decision Dismissing His
Petition, filed Oct. 30, 2020, at ¶¶ 1-2 (ECF No. 57). Petitioner states that he understands that a
decision by the Special Master will result in a judgment against him, and that he has been
advised that such judgment will end all of his rights under the Vaccine Act. Id. at ¶ 3.
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 the vaccination, or (2) that she suffered an injury that was actually caused by the vaccination.
See §§ 11(c)(1), 13(a)(1)(A). The records submitted by petitioner show that she does not meet
the statutory requirement under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-11(c)(1)(D)(i) to establish entitlement to
compensation. The Federal Circuit has explained that the eligibility requirements in Section
11(c) are not mere pleading requirements or matters of proof at trial, but instead are “threshold
criteri[a] for seeking entry into the compensation program.” Black v. Sec’y of Health & Hum.
Servs., 93 F.3d 781, 785-87 (Fed. Cir. 1996).
Accordingly, in light of petitioner’s motion and a review of the record, the undersigned
finds that petitioner is not entitled to compensation. Thus, this case is dismissed. The Clerk
shall enter judgment accordingly.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Nora Beth Dorsey
Nora Beth Dorsey
Special Master
2