VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_21-vv-01690
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_21-vv-01690
Petitioner: Kyle Pappas
Filed: 2021-08-12
Decided: 2023-11-06
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 2019-11-24
Condition: Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS)
Outcome: compensated
Award amount USD: 172500

AI-assisted case summary:
Kyle Pappas filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, alleging that he suffered Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS) as a result of an influenza vaccine he received on November 24, 2019. The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, conceded entitlement to compensation, agreeing that Mr. Pappas suffered GBS following the flu vaccine within the Table time period and that there was no evidence of an unrelated cause. The respondent also agreed that the condition met the statutory severity requirements because it persisted for more than six months. A ruling on entitlement was issued on September 13, 2022, finding Mr. Pappas entitled to compensation. As the parties could not resolve damages informally, a hearing was held on October 6, 2023. Mr. Pappas requested $180,000.00 for pain and suffering, while the respondent recommended less than $160,000.00. On November 6, 2023, the court awarded Mr. Pappas a lump sum of $172,500.00 for his actual pain and suffering.

Theory of causation field:
Table

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_21-vv-01690-0
Date issued/filed: 2022-10-14
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC ORDER/RULING (Originally filed: 09/13/2022) regarding 24 Ruling on Entitlement ( Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. )(mpj) Service on parties made.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:21-vv-01690-UNJ Document 26 Filed 10/14/22 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 21-1690V
UNPUBLISHED
KYLE PAPPAS, Chief Special Master Corcoran
Petitioner, Filed: September 13, 2022
v.
Special Processing Unit (SPU);
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;
HUMAN SERVICES, Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine;
Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS)
Respondent.
Nancy Routh Meyers, Turning Point Litigation, Greensboro, NC, for Petitioner.
Mary Eileen Holmes, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1
On August 12, 2021, Kyle Pappas filed a petition for compensation under the
National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq.2 (the
“Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleges that he suffered a Table injury – Guillain-Barre
Syndrome (GBS) – as a result of his November 24, 2019 influneza (“flu”) vaccination.
Petition at 1, ¶ 27. Petitioner further alleges that his condition persisted for more than six
months and that there has been no prior award or settlement of a civil action on his behalf
as a result of his injury. See Petition ¶¶ 24-25, 27.
On September 7, 2022, Respondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he concedes
that Petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report at
1. Specifically, Respondent indicates as follows:
1 Because this unpublished Ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am 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 Ruling 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 (2012).

Case 1:21-vv-01690-UNJ Document 26 Filed 10/14/22 Page 2 of 2
Medical personnel at the Division of Injury Compensation Programs,
Department of Health and Human Services (“DICP”), have reviewed the
petition and medical records filed in this case and have concluded that
petitioner suffered GBS following a flu vaccine within the Table time
period, and there is not a preponderance of the medical evidence that
petitioner’s GBS was due to a factor unrelated to the vaccination.
Id. at 5 (citing See 42 C.F.R. § 100.3(a); 42 U.S.C. 6 § 300aa-13(a)(1)). Respondent
further agrees that
[t]he claim also meets the statutory severity requirements because
petitioner experienced sequelae of his GBS for more than six months. See
42 U.S.C. § 300aa-11(c)(1)(D)(i). Therefore, based on the record as it now
stands, compensation is appropriate, as petitioner has satisfied all legal
prerequisites for compensation under the Act.
Id. at 6.
In view of Respondent’s position and the evidence of record, I find that
Petitioner is entitled to compensation.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Brian H. Corcoran
Brian H. Corcoran
Chief Special Master
2

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 2: USCOURTS-cofc-1_21-vv-01690-1
Date issued/filed: 2023-11-06
Pages: 3
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 10/06/2023) regarding 41 DECISION of Special Master (Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. )(mpj) Service on parties made.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:21-vv-01690-UNJ Document 47 Filed 11/06/23 Page 1 of 3
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 21-1690V
KYLE PAPPAS, Chief Special Master Corcoran
Petitioner, Filed: October 6, 2023
v.
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES,
Respondent.
Cooper Harrell, Turning Point Litigation, Greensboro, NC, for Petitioner.
Mary Eileen Holmes, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1
On August 12, 2021, Kyle Pappas filed a petition for compensation under the
National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq.2 (the
“Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleged he suffered a Table injury – Guillain-Barré syndrome
(“GBS”) – as a result of an influenza vaccine received on November 24, 2019. Petition at
1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.
On September 13, 2022, a ruling on entitlement was issued, finding Petitioner entitled to
compensation for GBS. ECF No. 24. Because the parties could not informally resolve the
issue of damages, they filed briefs setting forth their respective arguments and were
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).

Case 1:21-vv-01690-UNJ Document 47 Filed 11/06/23 Page 2 of 3
notified that I would resolve this dispute via an expedited “Motions Day” hearing, which
took place on October 6, 2023.
Petitioner has requested an award of $180,000.00 for Petitioner’s actual pain and
suffering, while Respondent recommends an award of less than $160,000.00.
At the conclusion of the Motions Day hearing, and after listening to the arguments
of both sides, I issued an oral ruling on damages constituting my findings of fact and
conclusions of law, pursuant to Section 12(d)(3)(A). (An official recording of the
proceeding was taken by a court reporter, although a transcript has not yet been filed in
this matter – but I hereby fully adopt and incorporate that oral ruling as officially recorded.)
In addition, in another recent decision I discussed at length the legal standard to be
considered in determining damages in cases involving GBS as the injury. I fully adopt and
hereby incorporate my prior discussion of the legal standard and statistical data for such
cases from Schenck v. Sec'y of Health & Hum. Servs., No. 21-1768V, 2023 WL 2534594,
at *1-3, n.7 (Fed. Cl. Mar. 16, 2023). The official recording of my oral ruling also includes
my discussion of various comparable cases, as well as specific facts relating to
Petitioner’s medical history and experience that further informed my decision awarding
damages herein.
Based on my consideration of the complete record as a whole and the parties’
arguments, and for the reasons discussed at the Motions Day argument, pursuant to
Section 12(d)(3)(A) I find that $172,500.00 represents a fair and appropriate amount
of compensation for Petitioner’s actual pain and suffering.3
Accordingly, I award Petitioner a lump sum payment of $172,500.00 in the form
of a check payable to Petitioner. This amount represents compensation for all damages
that would be available under Section 15(a).
3 Since this amount is being awarded for actual, rather than projected, pain and suffering, no reduction to
net present value is required. See Section 15(f)(4)(A); Childers v. Sec’y of Health & Hum. Servs., No. 96-
0194V, 1999 WL 159844, at *1 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Mar. 5, 1999) (citing Youngblood v. Sec’y of Health &
Hum. Servs., 32 F.3d 552 (Fed. Cir. 1994)).
2

Case 1:21-vv-01690-UNJ Document 47 Filed 11/06/23 Page 3 of 3
The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this Decision.4
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Brian H. Corcoran
Brian H. Corcoran
Chief Special Master
4 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.
3