Opinion

Flores v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

Court
United States Court of Federal Claims
Filed
Mar 3, 2021
Status
Unpublished
On the bench
Brian H. Corcoran
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 19-0818V

UNPUBLISHED

ANA MARGARITA FLORES, Chief Special Master Corcoran

Petitioner, Filed: January 22, 2021

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.

Paul Adrian Green, Law Office, Pasadena, CA, for Petitioner.

Mallori Browne Openchowski, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for

Respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

On June 3, 2019, Ana Margarita Flores 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 she suffered Guillain-Barré syndrome (“GBS”) as a

result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccine administered on October 14, 2018. Petition at

Introduction. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of

Special Masters.

On January 19, 2021, 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 states that “[m]edical personnel at the Division of Injury

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Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required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 “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa

(2012).

Compensation Programs, Department of Health and Human Services (‘DICP’), have

reviewed the petition and medical records filed in the case, and have determined that

compensation is appropriate. DICP has concluded that petitioner’s alleged GBS is

consistent with the Vaccine Injury Table for GBS following the seasonal flu vaccination

she received on October 14, 2018. DICP found that the onset of petitioner’s symptoms

fell within 3 to 42 days after vaccination. In addition, there is not a preponderance of

medical evidence demonstrating that petitioner’s GBS was due to a factor unrelated to

the flu vaccine.” Id. at 8. Respondent further agrees that Petitioner’s records show that

she suffered the sequela of her injury for more than six months after vaccination. Id.

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

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.