A.G. v. HHS - Rotavirus, intussusception (2025)
Case summary [AI summaries can sometimes make mistakes]
Raleigh and Cyrus Gharbi filed a petition on January 8, 2025, on behalf of their minor child, A.G., alleging that A.G. suffered from intussusception as a result of receiving a rotavirus vaccination on June 13, 2023. They further alleged that A.G. suffered residual effects of the injury for more than six months.
The Respondent filed a Rule 4(c) report conceding that A.G.'s intussusception meets the criteria of the Vaccine Injury Table and that the Petitioners have satisfied all legal prerequisites for compensation. Based on the Respondent's concession and the evidence of record, Chief Special Master Brian H.
Corcoran found that A.G. is entitled to compensation. The case is proceeding to determine damages.
The public decision does not describe the specific onset of symptoms, diagnostic tests, treatments, or expert witnesses. Petitioner counsel was Diana Lynn Stadelnikas of Maglio Christopher & Toale, PA.
Respondent counsel was Michael Bliley of the U.S. Department of Justice.
Theory of causation
Petitioners Raleigh and Cyrus Gharbi filed on behalf of minor A.G., alleging intussusception following a rotavirus vaccination on June 13, 2023, with residual effects lasting over six months. The Respondent conceded that A.G.'s condition meets the criteria of the Vaccine Injury Table and that Petitioners satisfied all legal prerequisites for compensation. Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran issued a ruling on February 7, 2025, finding A.G. entitled to compensation based on the Respondent's concession. The case is proceeding to determine damages. The specific mechanism of injury, expert testimony, and detailed medical evidence are not described in the public text. Petitioner counsel: Diana Lynn Stadelnikas. Respondent counsel: Michael Bliley.
Source PDFs
USCOURTS-cofc-1_24-vv-00652