Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
4,740 results
1.29s
Eason v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 30, 2022
“To qualify as any subtype of GBS, there must not be a more likely alternative diagnosis for the weakness.” 42 C.F.R. § 100.3(c)(15)(v). … “To qualify as any subtype of GBS, there must not be a more likely alternative diagnosis for the weakness.” 42 C.F.R. § 100.3(c)(15)(v).
Cited 0 timesPublishedCasitas Municipal Water District v. United States
102 Fed. Cl. 443 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 5, 2011
Such a balance, defendant maintains, must clearly be struck in favor of the fish. … Clearly, plaintiff cannot be required to draw the reservoir dry before it can demonstrate harm.
Cited 6 timesPublishedAl Andalus General Contracts Co. v. United States
86 Fed. Cl. 252 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 11, 2009
Indeed, as noted above, the language of the solicitation clearly emphasized the importance of these worksheets. … The solicitation clearly mandated the provision of this information, and the plaintiff did not provide it.
Cited 14 timesPublishedCivatte v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 19, 2024
) to a petitioner’s burden to establish entitlement under the Vaccine Act. … As previously explained: [U]nder the Vaccine Act, the Program is the payor of ‘last resort,’ and may only award qualifying unreimbursed expenses.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedLucarelli v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 13, 2019
Bodor explained that when a vaccination is administered into the subdeltoid bursa it can cause a robust local and immune inflammatory response resulting in pain and reduced range of motion. … Bodor is well qualified to opine on the subject.
Cited 0 timesUnpublished73 Fed. Cl. 227 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 12, 2006
In response, the government argues that the present ease is distinguishable from In re Air Transportation Excise Tax because in this case MTC’s bills very clearly identified the amount of tax it collected from each client … Pearce does not qualify as an expert in the subjects he discusses. Mr. Brinskele has also moved to strike defendant’s exhibit 14, the FCC tariff of U.S. West, on the grounds that it is irrelevant.
Cited 3 timesPublishedSchmidt v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 9, 2021
The second record is a handwritten “Seasonal Influenza Immunization Consent Form” reflecting the injection site as “RA”: 5 By contrast, Federal Circuit rulings concerning legal issues are binding on special masters. … Bruce’s affidavit primarily consists of a reiteration of the information contained in the medical records, clearly establishes that Dr. Abrams reviewed Dr. Bruce’s affidavit. Incidentally, I also note that while Dr.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedAlabama Aircraft Industries, Inc.-Birmingham v. United States
83 Fed. Cl. 666 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Sep 30, 2008
Whether Alabama Aircraft qualifies as an “interested party” and has standing to protest must be addressed as a threshold issue in this case. A. … Alabama Aircraft maintains that the Air Force failed to analyze proper records in its source selection process and thus failed to discern “the notion that Boeing’s pattern of misconduct clearly demonstrated its unsatisfactory
Reversed on other grounds by Alabama Aircraft Industries, Inc.—Birmingham v. United States, 586 F.3d 1372 (2009)Cited 25 timesPublishedErhart v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 8, 2026
that he received 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; suffered the residual effects of his … Indeed, the records clearly state that Petitioner’s symptoms, while greatly improved, had not completely abated at the time of discharge, but that Petitioner “no longer requires the skilled intervention of a therapist.”
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedIron Bow Technologies, LLC v. United States
132 Fed. Cl. 346 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 1, 2017
Each labor category must clearly state what company the personnel are from (i.e. OEM, Offeror, or Other subcontractor). … We are confident we had proposed a LoE that would provide for a successful project assessment, design and integration with qualified personnel.
Cited 5 timesPublishedPryor v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Sep 19, 2025
either in the United States and its territories or in another geographical area but qualifying for a limited exception; suffered the residual effects of his injury for more than six months, died from his injury, or underwent … As I have previously observed, “the Vaccine Act clearly does not require that symptoms be recorded within a specific timeframe to be preponderantly established.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedHitt v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 13, 2021
Erwin, Lemtrada attempts to reset the body’s immune system. Tr. 248. Specifically, Lemtrada suppresses production of T cells, which target viruses. … Standards for Adjudication Petitioners bear the burden of establishing elements of compensation by a preponderance of the evidence. 42 U.S.C. § 300aa–13(a).
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedRandall v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 9, 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 the same record, “Miller[-]Fisher syndrome” is again listed under past medical history in connection with “Dtap [sic] immunization.” Id.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedClark v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 10, 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 … A petitioner has the burden of establishing entitlement to compensation through one of two ways.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedLiu v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · May 14, 2019
Miller “indicated [an] immune system (reactive) cell infiltration to the brain,” and further, that Dr. … Cl. 148, 153 (2012) (ruling that “engaging in settlement negotiations does not in itself establish the reasonable basis of a claim.”)).
Cited 0 timesPublishedHitkansut LLC v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 15, 2019
Cl. 353, and Hitkansut qualifies under the size limits imposed by the statute. … Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424, 437 (1983) (“[T]he fee applicant bears the burden of establishing entitlement to an award.”).
Cited 0 timesPublished79 Fed. Cl. 148 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 7, 2007
The Reclamation Act of 1902 established the Bureau of Reclamation of the Department of the Interior. 43 U.S.C. § 371 (2000); Pis.’ Mem. at 6. … Whether the mobile homes are plaintiffs’ property or their permittees’ property, mobile homes will be not be retained by the Bureau and thus do not qualify as permanent facilities for which plaintiffs are entitled to fair
Cited 20 timesPublishedRay v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 1, 2021
The Report asserts that the record “clearly establishes” that petitioner’s condition began more than ten weeks after vaccination (on December 22, 2018), thus well outside of the Table timeframe. ECF No. 21 at 5. … Sept. 24, 2020) (finding the petitioner did not establish the onset of his GBS within the 3-42 day time frame prescribed and thus did not establish a Table Injury). IV.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedInformation Sciences Corp. v. United States
73 Fed. Cl. 70 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Sep 19, 2006
[Plaintiff] need not show that it would have received the award in competition with other hypothetical bidders, [but rather] must show that it would have been a qualified bidder. … (citations omitted); SAI Indus., 60 Fed.Cl. at 747 (“The public’s interest is clearly served when suppliers engage in fair and robust competition for government contracts.
Cited 73 timesPublishedPistulka v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 29, 2025
that he received 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 … Concerning the situs of vaccination, Petitioner argues that the only evidence suggesting that the vaccine was administered in his right arm is a computer-generated immunization history, with all remaining evidence supporting
Cited 0 timesUnpublished
Ask Donna