VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_20-vv-00553
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_20-vv-00553
Petitioner: L.R.
Filed: 2020-05-04
Decided: 2024-03-25
Vaccine: 
Vaccination date: 
Condition: Angelman Syndrome
Outcome: dismissed
Award amount USD: 

AI-assisted case summary:
On May 4, 2020, Daisy Rodriguez, as mother and natural guardian of L.R., a minor, filed a petition seeking compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. The petition alleged that L.R.'s Angelman Syndrome and associated symptoms were caused by the diphtheria-tetanus-acellular pertussis/Hepatitis B/inactivated polio, haemophilus influenzae type B, pneumococcal conjugate 13-valent, and rotavirus vaccines received in May 2020. In October 2023, Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran informed the petitioner's counsel that the claim had significant issues, appearing to rely on an untenable, thimerosal-related causation theory. The Special Master ordered the petitioner to file a brief showing cause why the case should not be dismissed by January 22, 2024. The petitioner's counsel was granted a 30-day extension to February 22, 2024, to respond, citing illness in January 2024. However, the extended deadline passed without a response, further motions, or any communication from counsel. The Special Master noted that the petitioner had failed to prosecute the case and comply with court orders. Under the Vaccine Act, a petition must be supported by medical records or a physician's opinion, and the public decision states there was insufficient evidence in the record for the petitioner to meet her burden of proof. The Special Master dismissed the petition for failure to comply with court orders and for insufficient evidence. Judgment was to be entered in accordance with the decision.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioner Daisy Rodriguez alleged that her minor child, L.R., developed Angelman Syndrome and associated symptoms due to the diphtheria-tetanus-acellular pertussis/Hepatitis B/inactivated polio, haemophilus influenzae type B, pneumococcal conjugate 13-valent, and rotavirus vaccines received in May 2020. The Special Master identified significant issues with the claim, specifically noting an "untenable, thimerosal-related causation theory." The petitioner was ordered to show cause why the case should not be dismissed, but failed to respond by the court-ordered deadlines, even after an extension was granted. The Special Master found that the petitioner lacked the necessary expert support to substantiate her claim and failed to meet her burden of proof under the Vaccine Act, leading to the dismissal of the petition. The specific mechanism of injury and expert opinions were not detailed in the public decision. The case was dismissed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran on February 27, 2024, for failure to prosecute and insufficient evidence.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_20-vv-00553-0
Date issued/filed: 2024-03-25
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 2/27/2024) regarding 37 DECISION of Special Master. Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. (ag) Service on parties made.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:20-vv-00553-UNJ Document 38 Filed 03/25/24 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 20-553V
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*
DAISY RODRIGUEZ, as mother and *
natural guardian of L.R., a minor, * Chief Special Master Corcoran
*
Petitioner, * Filed: February 27, 2024
*
v. *
*
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND *
HUMAN SERVICES *
*
Respondent. *
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
DECISION DISMISSING PETITION1
On May 4, 2020, Daisy Rodriguez filed a petition on behalf of her minor child (L.R.)
seeking compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (the “Vaccine
Program”). 2 Petitioner alleges that her child’s Angelman Syndrome (“AS”) and associated
symptoms were caused by the diphtheria-tetanus-acellular pertussis/Hepatitis B/inactivated polio,
haemophilus influenzae type B, pneumococcal conjugate 13-valent, and rotavirus vaccines.
Petition (ECF No. 1) at 1-2.
In October 2023, I informed Petitioner’s counsel during a status conference that the claim
had significant issues, since it appeared to rely on an untenable, thimerosal-related causation
theory. See Scheduling Order (ECF No. 35) at 2. I therefore ordered Petitioner to file – on or before
January 22, 2024 - a brief showing cause as to why the case should not be dismissed. Since my
Order provided Petitioner three months in which to act, and since I explicitly discussed with
1 Under Vaccine Rule 18(b), each party has fourteen (14) days within which to request redaction “of any information
furnished by that party: (1) that is a trade secret or commercial or financial in substance and is privileged or
confidential; or (2) that includes medical files or similar files, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly
unwarranted invasion of privacy.” Vaccine Rule 18(b). Otherwise, the whole Decision will be available to the public
in its present form. Id.
2 The Vaccine Program comprises Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660,
100 Stat. 3758, codified as amended at 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-10 through 34 (2012) (“Vaccine Act” or “the Act”).
Individual section references hereafter will be to § 300aa of the Act (but will omit that statutory prefix).

Case 1:20-vv-00553-UNJ Document 38 Filed 03/25/24 Page 2 of 2
counsel the claim’s issues during the status conference (as the Order clearly reveals), it cannot be
said that Petitioner was not given a fair opportunity to act in reaction to my Order.
On the very day her response was due, however, Petitioner moved for an extension of time
to February 22, 2024, to respond to the existing Order to Show Cause. ECF No. 36. In so doing,
counsel represented that illness in January 2024 had inhibited his ability to work on the response,
but that an additional 30 days would be sufficient to complete it. Id. at 1. The motion said nothing
about work performed on the response prior to January. I granted the motion, but noted that no
further time would be permitted to comply with my October 2023 Order, as I had significant
concerns with the claim and Petitioner had already been given three months to act. See Docket
Entry, dated January 23, 2024.
Now, the February 22nd due date for the response to my Order to Show Cause has also
passed – with no word from counsel, no response, and no motion to extend time again.
Under Vaccine Rule 21(b), a special master may dismiss a case for the failure of the
petitioner to prosecute or comply with any order of the special master. In this case, Petitioner has
failed during the pendency of this case to respond to the deadlines I have set. And otherwise, she
lacks expert support needed to substantiate her claim – and (as noted to her over three months ago)
asserts a causal theory that simply is not likely to succeed.
Under the Vaccine Act, a petitioner may not receive a Vaccine Program award based solely
on her claims alone. Rather, the petition must be supported by either medical records or by the
opinion of a competent physician. Section 13(a)(1). In this case, there is insufficient evidence in
the record for Petitioner to meet her burden of proof. Therefore, Petitioner’s claim cannot succeed
and must be dismissed. Section 11(c)(1)(A).
Accordingly, I hereby DISMISS Petitioner’s case. In the absence of a motion for review
filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, and pursuant to Vaccine Rule 21(b)(2), the Clerk of the Court
SHALL ENTER JUDGMENT in accordance with the terms of this Decision.3
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/Brian H. Corcoran
Brian H. Corcoran
Chief Special Master
3 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties may expedite entry of judgment if (jointly or separately) they file notices
renouncing their right to seek review.
2