C.K. v. HHS - HPV, Henoch-Schonlein purpura (2021)
Case summary [AI summaries can sometimes make mistakes]
Amanda Kirby, on behalf of C.K., filed a petition for vaccine compensation on December 30, 2019, alleging that the Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine caused C.K. to develop Henoch-Schonlein purpura (HSP). The respondent was the Secretary of Health and Human Services.
To be eligible for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, a petitioner must demonstrate either a Table Injury corresponding to the vaccination or that the vaccine actually caused the injury. Additionally, a severity requirement must be met, which can be satisfied by showing residual effects of the injury lasting more than six months after vaccination or by demonstrating that the injury necessitated both inpatient hospitalization and surgical intervention.
In this case, the Special Master found that the medical records and other evidence were insufficient to prove that C.K. suffered residual effects of HSP for more than six months post-vaccination, or that the condition required both inpatient hospitalization and surgical intervention. Consequently, the petitioner was deemed ineligible for compensation.
Special Master Mindy Michaels Roth issued a decision on December 14, 2021, dismissing the case. The public decision was posted on the Court of Federal Claims' website.
Amy Senerth, Esq., represented the petitioner, and Zoe Wade, Esq., represented the respondent. The case was dismissed, and judgment was to be entered accordingly.
Theory of causation
Petitioner Amanda Kirby, on behalf of C.K., alleged that the Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine caused Henoch-Schonlein purpura (HSP). The petition was filed on December 30, 2019. To be eligible for compensation, the petitioner must prove either a Table Injury or actual causation by the vaccine, and must also meet a severity requirement. The severity requirement can be met by demonstrating residual effects lasting more than six months post-vaccination or by showing the injury required inpatient hospitalization and surgical intervention. The Special Master determined that the evidence was insufficient to prove either the duration of residual effects or the necessity of inpatient hospitalization and surgical intervention. Therefore, the petitioner was ineligible for compensation. The case was dismissed by Special Master Mindy Michaels Roth on December 14, 2021. Petitioner was represented by Amy Senerth, Esq., and respondent by Zoe Wade, Esq. The public decision does not describe the specific mechanism of causation, expert testimony, or detailed clinical information regarding C.K.'s condition or treatment.
Source PDFs
USCOURTS-cofc-1_19-vv-01983