Case law

Salim v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 25, 2016

Salim alleged that he experienced medical problems related to immune system dysfunction as a result of the vaccinations he received in November 2012 in Kuwait, while working as a translator employed by an independent contractor … Further, the record does not contain sufficient persuasive evidence establishing that Petitioner could advance his claim given the locus of his vaccine administration, along with his employment status.

McCauley v. States

38 Fed. Cl. 250 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 30, 1997

To establish a claim upon which relief can be granted, a plaintiff must allege the elements necessary to establish the existence of an express contract or an implied-in-fact contract. Trauma Serv. Group v. … In order to establish jurisdiction based on an implied-in-fact contract, the plaintiff also must establish the elements of a contract, including offer, acceptance, consideration, mutuality of intent, and definiteness of terms

Sharma v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 28, 2020

furnished by that party: (1) that is a trade secret or commercial or financial in substance and is privileged or confidential; or (2) that includes medical files or similar files, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly … In his Motion for Ruling on the Record, petitioner claims the vaccinations “caused him to develop auto-immune gastritis, pernicious anemia (an auto-immune disease), ankylosing spondylitis (an auto-immune disease), and ongoing

First Enterprise v. United States

61 Fed. Cl. 109 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 25, 2004

There is no argument that plaintiff was a qualified bidder that was “within the zone of active consideration,” since it was the lowest bidder after Ace withdrew. Statistica, Inc., 102 F.3d at 1581 . … Applying these standards, this court finds that the contracting officer clearly had a rational basis for selecting DJM’s bid for alternate bid item 6.

Brighton Village Associates v. United States

31 Fed. Cl. 324 · United States Court of Federal Claims · May 16, 1994

Cofield, are not in privity of contract with the United States and that only the Nominee Trust is in privity of contract and may sue in this matter. 7 The waiver of sovereign immunity exists only to the extent a party is … Such breach claims, which do not qualify as Wunderlich Act claims brought under the contract, are brought under the Tucker Act on a direct access basis.

Tucker v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 15, 2019

supports ALJ Barrett's conclusion that the physicians’ orders in the record do not establish the medical necessity of the services rendered by Dr. … The United States Supreme Court has found that “a court may dismiss a claim as factually frivolous only if the facts alleged are ‘clearly baseless’ . . . a category encompassing allegations that are ‘fanoiful’ . . .

Campbell v. States

38 Fed. Cl. 524 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 28, 1997

Even construing plaintiff’s claims liberally, due to her pro se status, the plaintiff has failed to establish jurisdiction in this court, or to establish a claim upon which relief can be granted. … Stated otherwise, “[t]he 6-year statute of limitations on actions against the United States is a jurisdictional requirement attached by Congress as a condition of the government’s waiver of sovereign immunity and, as such

Anderson v. United States

59 Fed. Cl. 451 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 17, 2004

United States, 47 F.3d 1140, 1144 (Fed.Cir. 1995) (“no court is qualified to review the substantive merits of a decision [committed to the discretion of the military], so long as the decision comports with any procedural … For I can not [sic] seek restitution from the men who perpetrated that harm upon me; they are immune to prosecution. My only recourse is to seek justice through the ABCMR.

Henry v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 29, 2026

Henning thought was “likely immunization related shoulder bursitis given timing of the tetanus shot and onset of pain.” Id. at 24. On November 18, 2020, Petitioner returned to Dr. … a vaccine covered by the Program, administered either in the United States and its territories or in another geographical area but qualifying for a limited exception and has not filed a civil suit or collected an award or

Accelgov, LLC v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 2, 2024

(further noting the contract was a “JV between [***]; possibly not qualified”). … These clearly disclosed requirements should have conveyed to AccelGov that the Solicitation sought innovation and forward thinking.

Muller v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · May 6, 2025

See id. at 1174 (“[Plaintiff] has little difficulty establishing that § 1201 is understood as money-mandating.”); Verbeck v. United States, 89 Fed. … Cir. 2004) (“It is well established that the Military Pay Act is a money-mandating statute.”) (citing Dysart v. United States, 369 F.3d 1303, 1315 (Fed. Cir. 2004)).

Vladimir Kogan, Md v. the United States of America 1

112 Fed. Cl. 253 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 27, 2013

. § 7431 (2006)) (establishing the pay structure for VA physicians). … The court considers the readings of both parties reasonable because neither the plain language of Paragraph 3.E nor the remainder of the Settlement Agreement clearly establishes for what period of time the VA obligated itself

Garris v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 19, 2025

Okuda clearly established. See, e.g., Banwell at 272 tbl. 1. … In particular, there was no reliably-established MS-hepatitis B vaccine association, and no evidence that the specific immune reaction to the vaccine likely causes the production of cross- reactive antibodies capable of driving

Perekotiy v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 5, 2020

Spergel explained individuals with atopic dermatitis experience higher rates of sensitizations and other immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. Id. at 12. … In support, Petitioner argues that she has produced a well-qualified expert immunologist (Dr. Axelrod), a well-qualified expert dermatologist (Dr. Wikas), and a well-qualified treating physician (Dr Jorgensen). Id at 4.

Kraft, Inc. v. United States

30 Fed. Cl. 739 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 28, 1994

Clearly taxpayer would not have given a competitor its customer list if it ever intended to return to the market. … . § 1.48-8 (1986), and thus did not qualify for ITC treatment.

Hale v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · May 14, 2019

The amended returns both qualify as timely claims for refund because they were filed within three years of the original return. I.R.C. § 6511 (a); Def. 's Mot. … Documents submitted by the parties in this case establish that the IRS sent Ms.

Jordan v. Secretary of Department of Health & Human Services

38 Fed. Cl. 148 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 31, 1993

The special master also concluded that the vaccination did not significantly aggravate Matthew’s preexisting condition, so as to qualify under § 11(c)(1)(C), because petitioners’ evidence did not show that Matthew’s condition … They argue that to establish causation in fact a respondent must meet the same standard that applies to a petitioner seeking to establish actual (off-Table) causation, i.e., evidence of a medical theory causally connecting

Aero Corp., S.A. v. United States

42 Cont. Cas. Fed. 77,213 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 18, 1997

Thus, plaintiff maintains that the submitted documents show that it clearly understands the technical requirements document. … A “comparison” is defined as “the representing of one thing ... as similar to or like another[; or] an examination of two or more items to establish similarities and dissimilarities.”

Clark v. United States

50 Fed. Cl. 727 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 29, 2001

Plaintiff has established jurisdiction here because Plaintiff alleges that he has been a sergeant in the Alabama National Guard since on or about April 1987. Compl. 1Í7. … The definitions of Section 101 of Title 37 clearly distinguish National Guard, 3 National Guard of the United States, 4 and Reserve *731 Component. 5 Thus, while the National Guard of the United States is enumerated as a

Fisher v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 28, 2024

Kreckman, infant Fisher was worse, and by 12/21/2015 she had clearly developed a neurological disorder (dysconjugate gaze).” Id. Second, Dr. … These medical records clearly document the existence of one and likely more than one infection.