Edwin Weiss v. HHS - Influenza, Guillain-Barré syndrome (2025)

On November 20, 2019, Edwin Weiss, a 73-year-old cardiologist, filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. He alleged that an influenza vaccine received on November 29, 2016, caused him to develop Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS), specifically the Miller Fisher variant, and that he experienced residual effects for more than six months.

Petitioner's medical records indicated that eleven days after vaccination, on December 10, 2016, he experienced a fainting spell. He was hospitalized on December 22, 2016, with symptoms including headaches, dizziness, ataxia, and left-sided weakness.

Diagnostic tests were consistent with GBS, and he received a five-day course of intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) therapy. He was discharged on December 26, 2016, with mild improvement in his facial droop, normal strength, gait, coordination, and sensation, and continued decreased reflexes.

Petitioner did not seek care for GBS sequelae in 2017. An ophthalmologist noted on April 2, 2017, that his GBS was "back to normal." Medical records from 2018 indicated recovery from alleged GBS-related symptoms, with a nurse practitioner noting a "full recovery" from GBS on July 23, 2018.

On October 24, 2018, an infectious disease specialist noted his GBS had improved but he still had balance issues, though his neurological examination was normal. On November 14, 2018, his neurologist noted "mild gait ataxia, most likely due to cerebellar dysfunction, perhaps related to the history of LGBS," and that it had improved and not worsened recently.

By November 6, 2019, his neurologist noted the mild gait ataxia had not worsened and could be within normal limits for age. Petitioner's own affidavit stated that while his condition improved at discharge, GBS had not completely resolved, and balance issues became a "real issue" shortly after discharge.

He stated he did not seek immediate medical attention for these issues, believing they were residuals of GBS for which nothing could be done. He later sought care from his neurologist in November 2018.

Petitioner's expert, Dr. Salvatore Q.

Napoli, opined that ataxia is a known residual of GBS and that Petitioner's GBS lasted more than six months, citing the 2018 and 2019 records. Respondent's expert, Dr.

Mark B. Bromberg, disagreed with the GBS diagnosis and opined that the balance issues were subjective findings, not clinical ataxia, and could be related to age.

Special Master Herbrina D. Young dismissed the petition, finding Petitioner failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that his GBS or its residual effects lasted for more than six months.

The Special Master noted a significant gap in medical records between December 2016 and October 2018, and that Petitioner's affidavit alone was insufficient to overcome contrary medical evidence. The Special Master found it unclear whether the balance issues were a new injury or age-related changes rather than ongoing GBS sequelae.

On review, the United States Court of Federal Claims, Judge Ryan T. Holte presiding, affirmed the Special Master's decision.

The court found that the Special Master considered the relevant evidence, including the notations from 2018 and 2019, and that the decision was not arbitrary or capricious. The court noted that while Petitioner's expert believed the balance issues were residuals of GBS, the contemporaneous medical records and the significant gap in treatment records did not preponderantly demonstrate the six-month severity requirement was met.

The court concluded that Petitioner's balance issues could be attributed to age rather than GBS, and that Petitioner's affidavit was insufficient to overcome the contrary medical evidence. The petition was denied.