Case law

Crutchfield v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 28, 2014

That evaluation included laboratory blood tests, which revealed her lack of immunity to measles (Ex. 2, p. 9), an “equivocal” immune response to mumps, and a response to rubella indicating immunity. (Ex. 2, p. 6.) … A repeat blood test on January 6, 2006, produced an “equivocal” result for measles, a “non-immune” result for mumps, and a result for rubella again indicating immunity. (Ex. 2, p. 11.)

Oakland Steel Corp. v. United States

40 Cont. Cas. Fed. 76,801 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 30, 1995

When subject matter jurisdiction is questioned, the non-moving party bears the burden of establishing the court’s jurisdiction. Reynolds, 846 F.2d at 748 . … The Tucker Act does not in and of itself create a substantive right to recover money but instead waives the United States sovereign immunity under specific conditions. United States v.

Doe 93 v. Secretary of Health & Human Services

98 Fed. Cl. 553 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 29, 2011

Miller et al., A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Trial of Influenza Immunization in Multiple Sclerosis, 48 Neurology 312 (1997) (“Influenza Immunization in MS”) — involved 104 patients, 49 who received … But, these authors refrain from concluding that causation has been established. Id. at *12.

Dobrydneva v. Secretary of Health & Human Services

94 Fed. Cl. 134 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 17, 2010

Oleske has been actively participating in a *141 Center for Disease Control study group, responsible for establishing criteria to standardize diagnostic criteria for adverse reactions to immunizations. Id. … Evaluation of [Ilya’s] immune system post HBV immunization demonstrated abnormal immune responses that would be characterized as common variable immune deficiency (CVID).

Schrader v. United States

75 Fed. Cl. 242 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 22, 2007

Finally, she was excluded from a Voice of America detail because of her gender, although she was qualified for participation. … “It long has been established, of course, that the United States, as sovereign, ‘is immune from suit save as it consents to be sued ... and the terms of its consent to be sued in any court define that court’s jurisdiction

Alimanestianu v. United States

130 Fed. Cl. 137 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 29, 2016

At the time of the explosion in 1989, there was no exception to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (“FSIA”) for state sponsors of terrorism, and Libya was immune from suit in the United States. … The Federal Circuit found that the Adams plaintiffs did not have a property interest in their GAO claim because the underlying subject matter of this claim - - entitlement to statutory compensation - - failed to qualify as

Radioshack Corp. v. United States

82 Fed. Cl. 155 · United States Court of Federal Claims · May 21, 2008

However, this Court’s jurisdiction is limited to “the extent to which the United States has waived its sovereign immunity.” Inter-Coastal Xpress, Inc. v. … filed a qualifying administrative refund claim” with the IRS.).

Kottenstette v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 1, 2020

Subsequently, however, on October 6, 2012, C.K. experienced another cluster of seizures that was clearly unrelated to nursing. (Tr. 10-11.) Ms. … So if I get hit in the head with a baseball bat and have a seizure, that doesn’t qualify as epilepsy. (Tr. 141-42.)

Caddell Construction Co., Inc. v. United States

111 Fed. Cl. 49 · United States Court of Federal Claims · May 22, 2013

The proposal clearly met RFP requirements. … Krips believed to be “clearly a similar project.” Mr.

El Dorado Springs v. United States

28 Fed. Cl. 132 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 12, 1993

The burden of proof to establish that this court has jurisdiction is on the plaintiff. Reynolds v. Army & Air Force Exchange Serv., 846 F.2d 746, 748 (Fed.Cir.1988). … Two statutory provisions that it cites clearly do not waive sovereign immunity. First, El Dorado cites 12 U.S.C. § 1713 (d).

Toon v. United States

96 Fed. Cl. 288 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 20, 2010

A waiver of immunity “cannot be implied but must be unequivocally expressed.” United States v. King, 395 U.S. 1, 4 , 89 S.Ct. 1501 , 23 L.Ed.2d 52 (1969). … When considering an RCFC 12(b)(1) motion, the burden of establishing the court’s subject matter jurisdiction resides with the party seeking to invoke it. See McNutt v. Gen.

Exum v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 20, 2025

,” may be a slight overstatement, it is of no moment because the Decision clearly stated the proper legal standard for Althen prong one. … immune response.”)

Hammitt v. United States

69 Fed. Cl. 165 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 20, 2005

The criminal judgment establishes that Mr. Vaughan’s conviction did not result in an in personam forfeiture of his property, contrary to the Hammitts’ claim. … The Fifth Amendment qualifies as a money-mandating provision that confers jurisdiction on this Court. Murray v. United States, 817 F.2d 1580, 1583 (Fed. Cir.1987). Nonetheless, the U.S.

Nutt v. United States

121 Fed. Cl. 579 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 4, 2015

The record clearly indicates that Plaintiffs filed an FTCA— not an MCA—claim. As such, Massie does not control. … The FTCA is a waiver of sovereign immunity. See Fed. Dep. Ins. Corp. v.

Brickwood Contractors, Inc. v. United States

77 Fed. Cl. 624 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 30, 2007

The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“Federal Circuit”) has not clearly resolved the question of whether or not a statute of limitations restricts the government’s waiver of sovereign immunity. … Recently, the Federal Circuit sitting en banc held that “[i]t is well established that statutes of limitations for causes of action against the United States, being conditions of waiver of sovereign immunity, are jurisdictional

Bender v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 2, 2018

Bender’s TM, he also proposed an opinion regarding causation (a topic he was less qualified to opine upon than Dr. Byers). See generally Tr. at 200-25. … Lee too found no such boost to nonspecific immune response, and Dr.

Godfrey v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 8, 2014

To establish legal causation in an off-Table case, Vaccine Act petitioners must establish by preponderant evidence: (1) a medical theory causally connecting the vaccination and the injury; (2) a logical sequence of cause … established that special masters may use the framework established by Daubert v.

Morgan v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 12, 2016

In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to delete medical or other information, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy. … Legal Standards to Establish Entitlement to Compensation The Vaccine Act established the Program to compensate vaccine-related injuries and deaths. § 300aa-10(a).

American Airlines, Inc. v. United States

77 Fed. Cl. 672 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 31, 2007

For a waiver to be effective, “it must be clearly established that there was ‘an intentional relinquishment or abandonment of a known right or privilege.’ ” See *681 Brookhart v. … a general waiver of immunity to suit); United States v. $7,990.00 U.S.

Skinner v. Secretary of Department of Health & Human Services

30 Fed. Cl. 402 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 2, 1994

The third DPT immunization was administered on April 17, 1985, in the office of her pediatrician. … Alternatively, petitioners contend that the developmental decline and severe problems in fact were caused by the third DPT immunization.