Laurence Chitlik v. HHS - Influenza, shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) (2025)
Case summary [AI summaries can sometimes make mistakes]
On December 7, 2022, Laurence Chitlik, a 71-year-old man, filed a pro se petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, alleging that an influenza vaccine he received on December 5 or 6, 2019, caused him to suffer a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA). He alleged that the pain began immediately after vaccination, with severely limited range of motion within 48 hours, and he began physical therapy in January 2020.
The respondent is the Secretary of Health and Human Services. The petitioner later obtained counsel, who filed an amended petition on September 4, 2024, alleging alternatively a Table SIRVA claim, a causation-in-fact SIRVA claim, and a significant aggravation claim.
On the same day, the petitioner's counsel filed a motion for equitable tolling of the statute of limitations. The petitioner argued that his petition was filed one day late, on December 7, 2022, as the 36-month statute of limitations expired on December 6, 2022.
He asserted that he mailed his petition via certified First-Class USPS mail on November 26, 2022, eight days before the deadline, and that the delay was caused by extraordinary circumstances, including the COVID-19 pandemic and USPS operational issues. The respondent opposed the motion, arguing that the petitioner did not exercise reasonable diligence by choosing First-Class mail over a guaranteed delivery service and that USPS delays are not extraordinary circumstances.
Special Master Herbrina D.S. Young denied the motion for equitable tolling on December 19, 2024, finding that the petitioner had not demonstrated reasonable diligence in filing his petition.
The Special Master noted that the petitioner could have used overnight delivery or Priority Mail Express for a guaranteed delivery. She also found that delays in regular mail are not extraordinary circumstances and that the petitioner had not provided sufficient evidence that the COVID-19 pandemic caused an extraordinary circumstance.
Consequently, the Special Master dismissed the petition as untimely. The petitioner sought review of this decision.
On March 27, 2025, Judge Richard A. Hertling of the U.S.
Court of Federal Claims issued a memorandum opinion and order affirming the Special Master's decision. Judge Hertling reviewed the case de novo and agreed that the petitioner failed to demonstrate reasonable diligence.
He found that the petitioner's choice of First-Class mail, especially during the busy holiday season, and his failure to monitor tracking information and respond to apparent delays, demonstrated a lack of reasonable diligence. Because the petitioner failed to meet the diligence prong, the court did not need to address the extraordinary circumstances prong.
The motion for review was denied, and the petition was dismissed. The public decision does not describe the specific mechanism of the alleged injury or name any medical experts.
Theory of causation
Petitioner Laurence Chitlik, age 71, received an influenza vaccine on December 6, 2019, and alleged immediate onset of shoulder pain and severely limited range of motion within 48 hours, consistent with a Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA). The petition was filed on December 7, 2022, one day after the 36-month statute of limitations expired, calculated from the alleged immediate onset of symptoms. Petitioner sought equitable tolling, arguing he mailed the petition via certified First-Class mail on November 26, 2022, eight days before the deadline, and that USPS delays, exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic, constituted extraordinary circumstances. Respondent opposed, arguing Petitioner failed to exercise reasonable diligence by not using a guaranteed delivery service and that USPS delays are not extraordinary. Special Master Herbrina D.S. Young denied equitable tolling, finding Petitioner lacked reasonable diligence in choosing First-Class mail and failing to monitor tracking, and that USPS delays were not extraordinary circumstances. Judge Richard A. Hertling affirmed, reviewing de novo and agreeing that Petitioner's failure to monitor tracking and respond to delays during the peak holiday mailing season demonstrated a lack of reasonable diligence, thus precluding equitable tolling. The petition was dismissed as untimely. No specific medical experts or causation mechanisms were detailed in the public decisions.