VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_20-vv-00836
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_20-vv-00836
Petitioner: John R. Darby
Filed: 2020-10-25
Decided: 2024-11-26
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 2017-12-11
Condition: Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS)
Outcome: dismissed
Award amount USD: 

AI-assisted case summary:
Corinn Darby filed a petition on behalf of her deceased husband, John R. Darby, alleging that an influenza vaccine received on December 11, 2017, caused Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) which led to his death by suicide. However, the petition stated that the onset of GBS did not occur until approximately February 13, 2018, more than two months after vaccination. The respondent argued that the case was not appropriate for compensation, citing the lack of a timely onset for a Table GBS claim. The petitioner subsequently agreed that she could not demonstrate a proximate temporal relationship between the vaccination and the onset of GBS, as the onset was over 60 days post-vaccination. The court found that the record did not contain sufficient evidence to demonstrate that Mr. Darby suffered a Table Injury or that his alleged injury was vaccine-caused. Therefore, the petition was denied and dismissed for insufficient proof.

Theory of causation field:
unclear

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_20-vv-00836-0
Date issued/filed: 2024-11-26
Pages: 3
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 10/25/2024) regarding 43 DECISION of Special Master ( Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. )(mpj) Service on parties made.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:20-vv-00836-UNJ Document 44 Filed 11/26/24 Page 1 of 3
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 20-836V
CORINN DARBY, as the personal Chief Special Master Corcoran
representative of JOHN R. DARBY, her
deceased husband, Filed: October 25, 2024
Petitioner,
v.
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES,
Respondent.
Curtis R. Webb, Curtis R. Webb Attorney at Law, Monmouth, OR, for Petitioner.
Nina Ren, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
DISMISSAL DECISION1
On July 9, 2020, Corinn Darby filed a Petition for compensation on behalf of her
deceased husband, John R. Darby, under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation
Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq.2 (the “Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleges that Mr.
Darby suffered from Guillain-Barré syndrome (“GBS”), which led to his death by suicide,
as a result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccine he received on December 11, 2017.3 Pet. at 1-
2. Petitioner further alleges, however, that the onset of Mr. Darby’s GBS did not occur
until approximately February 13, 2018 (at the earliest) – more than two months after
vaccination. Id. at 2.
1 Because this Decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action taken in this case, it must be made
publicly accessible and will be posted on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, and/or
at https://www.govinfo.gov/app/collection/uscourts/national/cofc, in accordance with the E-Government Act
of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2018) (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, I
agree that the identified material fits within this definition, I will redact such material from public access.
2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755. Hereinafter, for ease
of citation, all section references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. §
300aa (2018).
3 Petitioner did not explicitly allege a Table GBS claim or that of causation-in-fact.

Case 1:20-vv-00836-UNJ Document 44 Filed 11/26/24 Page 2 of 3
Following Respondent’s informal assessment and a review of the record,
Respondent filed a status report stating that this case is not appropriate for compensation
and requesting to file a Rule 4(c) Report in defense of Petitioner’s claim. ECF Nos. 22,
37. Respondent filed his Rule 4(c) Report on May 15, 2023. ECF No. 38. I subsequently
issued an Order to Show Cause for Petitioner’s failure to establish that the onset of Mr.
Darby’s GBS occurred within the 3-42 day period prescribed for a GBS Table claim. ECF
No. 40. I also afforded Petitioner an opportunity to offer additional evidence to support
reasonable onset for a non-Table claim. Id. at 7.
Petitioner submitted a response to my Order to Show Cause on December 20,
2023, stating that Petitioner has concluded that she will “not be able to demonstrate a
proximate temporal relationship between [Mr.] Darby’s [flu] vaccination and the onset of
his GBS” (64 days post vaccination). ECF No. 42 at 1. Additionally, she has not found
any caselaw determining that the onset of GBS “more than 60 days” post vaccination
supported vaccine-related causation. Id. at 2. Petitioner thus agrees dismissal of the claim
is appropriate.4 Id. at 1, 4.
To receive compensation under the Program, Petitioner must prove either 1) that
Mr. Darby suffered a “Table Injury” – i.e., an injury falling within the Vaccine Injury Table
– corresponding to his vaccination, or 2) that he suffered an injury that was actually
caused by a vaccine. See Sections 13(a)(1)(A) and 11(c)(1). Examination of the record
does not disclose preponderant evidence that Mr. Darby experienced the onset of his
GBS within 3-42 days of his vaccination or a “Table Injury.” Further, the record does not
contain a medical expert’s opinion or any other persuasive evidence indicating that Mr.
Darby’s alleged injury was vaccine-caused consistent with Althen. See Althen v. Sec’y of
Health and Hum. Servs., 418 F.3d 1274, 1278 (Fed. Cir. 2005).
Under the Vaccine Act, a petitioner may not be awarded compensation based on
the petitioner’s claims alone. Rather, the petition must be supported by either the medical
records or by a medical opinion. Section 13(a)(1). In this case, the record does not contain
medical records or a medical opinion sufficient to demonstrate that the vaccinee was
injured by a vaccine. For these reasons, in accordance with Section 12(d)(3)(A),
Petitioner’s claim for compensation is denied and this case is dismissed for
insufficient proof.
In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the Clerk
of Court is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this decision.5
4 Petitioner maintains she has established a reasonable basis for her claim. ECF No. 42 at 3-4. This
Decision will not address such arguments.
5 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment can be expedited by the parties’ joint filing of notice
renouncing the right to seek review.
2

Case 1:20-vv-00836-UNJ Document 44 Filed 11/26/24 Page 3 of 3
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Brian H. Corcoran
Brian H. Corcoran
Chief Special Master
3