Katie Tate v. HHS - HPV, type-1 diabetes, adrenal insufficiency, non-classical congenital adrenal hyperplasia, Hashimoto’s thyroiditis, amenorrhea, legally blind in one eye (2024)

On August 16, 2023, Katie Tate filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, alleging that the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccinations she received on December 12, 2017, and June 6, 2019, caused her to develop type-1 diabetes, adrenal insufficiency, non-classical congenital adrenal hyperplasia, Hashimoto’s thyroiditis, amenorrhea, and legal blindness in one eye. Petitioner, who was twelve years old at the time of her first vaccination and fourteen at the time of her second, also alleged experiencing symptoms such as knee pain, changes to menstrual cycles, extreme thirst, headaches, excessive weight loss, confusion, fatigue, and spasms.

The petition was filed over four years after her last vaccination and at least five years after she began experiencing symptoms. Petitioner argued for equitable tolling of the statute of limitations, asserting that she did not receive a Vaccine Information Statement (VIS) at either vaccination, that the vaccine manufacturer engaged in fraudulent concealment, and that her minor status prevented diligent pursuit of her rights.

Petitioner stated she learned of potential vaccine-related adverse effects in June 2023 and contacted an attorney shortly thereafter. The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, argued for dismissal due to untimeliness.

Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran reviewed the case and found that Petitioner failed to establish both diligent pursuit of her rights and the existence of extraordinary circumstances necessary for equitable tolling.

The Special Master noted that the statute of limitations begins to run from the manifestation of the first symptom, not from the discovery of a potential claim, and that lack of awareness of the Vaccine Program or the Act does not support tolling. The decision highlighted that the HPV vaccine was added to the Vaccine Injury Table in 2007, making this claim not a Table claim.

Regarding diligent pursuit, the Special Master found that the diligence of a parent or legal guardian is imputed to a minor. Petitioner's mother accompanied her to appointments and presumably handled her medical care, but Petitioner provided no evidence that her mother was ineffective or failed to diligently pursue a claim on her behalf.

The Special Master also noted that Petitioner's mother did not provide an affidavit regarding her understanding of the vaccine risks, receipt of VIS, or pursuit of a claim. Allegations of fraudulent concealment by the vaccine manufacturer were deemed speculative and not a basis for tolling, especially as the HPV vaccine is approved by the government and covered under the Act.

The Special Master also referenced prior decisions where medical science did not predominantly support the contention that the HPV vaccine can cause various autonomic issues. Consequently, the Special Master dismissed the case as untimely filed.

Petitioner was represented by Bijan Esfandiari of Wisner Baum LLP, and the respondent was represented by Julia M. Collison of the U.S.

Department of Justice.