Allard v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

CourtUnited States Court of Federal Claims
DecidedApril 3, 2020
Docket14-442
StatusPublished

This text of Allard v. Secretary of Health and Human Services (Allard v. Secretary of Health and Human Services) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Court of Federal Claims primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Allard v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, (uscfc 2020).

Opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 14-442V Filed: March 9, 2020

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ANGELA ALLARD, * TO BE PUBLISHED * Petitioner, * v. * Dismissal; Ruling on the Record; * Human Papillomavirus (“HPV”) SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Vaccine; Idiopathic Thrombocytopenic AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Purpura (“ITP”) * Respondent. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Mark Sadaka, Esq., Mark T. Sadaka, LLC, Englewood, NJ, for petitioner. Debra Begley, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

DECISION1

Roth, Special Master:

On May 23, 2014, Angela Allard (“Ms. Allard” or “petitioner”) filed a petition for compensation pursuant to the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.2 Petitioner alleges that she received a human papillomavirus (“HPV”) vaccination on June 2, 2011, and thereafter suffered from idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura (“ITP”), which was either caused or significantly aggravated by the HPV vaccine. See Petition (“Pet.”), ECF No. 1. On November 15, 2018, petitioner filed a Motion for Ruling on the Record. ECF No. 88. After careful review of the record, I find that petitioner has failed to carry her burden of showing that the HPV vaccination caused or significantly aggravated her ITP. The petition is accordingly dismissed.

1 This Decision has been designated “to be published,” which means I am directing it to be posted on the Court of Federal Claims’s website, in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-347, 116 Stat. 2899, 2913 (codified as amended at 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2006)). This means the Decision will available to anyone with access to the internet. However, the parties may object to the Decision’s inclusion of certain kinds of confidential information. Specifically, under Vaccine Rule 18(b), each party has fourteen days within which to request redaction “of any information 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 unwarranted invasion of privacy.” Vaccine Rule 18(b). Otherwise, the whole Ruling will be available to the public. Id. 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). I. Procedural History

The petition was filed May 23, 2014. Petition, ECF No. 1. Petitioner filed medical records on May 30, 2014 and July 2, 2014. Petitioner’s Exhibits (“Pet. Ex.”) 1-8, ECF Nos. 5, 7. On August 19, 2014, respondent filed his Rule 4(c) Report, stating that this matter was not appropriate for compensation. Resp. Report, ECF No. 8. Petitioner continued to file additional medical records through August of 2015. Pet. Ex. 9-19, ECF Nos. 9, 11, 22-23, 27, 30-31.

On December 4, 2015, petitioner filed an expert report from Dr. Eric Gershwin. Pet. Ex. 20-21, ECF No. 34. Petitioner later filed supporting medical literature. Pet. Ex. 22-101, ECF No. 36. A status conference was held on January 7, 2016. The special master previously assigned to this matter discussed Dr. Gershwin’s expert report with the parties and identified several issues for Dr. Gershwin to address in a supplemental expert report. Scheduling Order at 1-2, ECF No. 35.3

Petitioner filed a supplemental expert report from Dr. Gershwin on February 25, 2016. Pet. Ex. 103, ECF No. 40. Petitioner filed additional medical records on March 17, 2016. Pet. Ex. 104.1-104.3, ECF No. 41.

Respondent filed expert reports from Dr. Thomas Forsthuber and Dr. Steven McKenzie on June 27, 2016. Resp. Ex. A-B, ECF No. 45.

A status conference was held on August 3, 2016. Petitioner was ordered to file a supplemental report from Dr. Gershwin specifically addressing issues associated with petitioner’s medical history, including petitioner’s Gardnerella infection, petitioner’s use of phentermine at the time of her vaccination, petitioner’s prior instances of ITP, and an assault that petitioner endured that led to an emergency room visit on June 5, 2011. Scheduling Order at 1, ECF No. 47. Additionally, respondent stated that his expert hematologist had noted references to platelet counts dating from December of 2009 that had not been filed into the record. Id. Petitioner was ordered to file a status report regarding attempts to locate her platelet counts between December of 2009 and June 2, 2011, the date of vaccination. Id. at 1-2.

Petitioner filed medical records in October and December of 2016. Pet. Ex. 130-131, ECF Nos. 52, 54-55. These records did not include information regarding petitioner’s platelet counts in 2009 through the date of vaccination, June 2, 2011. Petitioner filed a third report from Dr. Gershwin on December 19, 2016. Pet. Ex. 132, ECF No. 56.

During a status conference held on February 7, 2017, I noted that Dr. Gershwin’s third report did not address any of the issues that he was asked to address during the previous status conference. Scheduling Order at 1, ECF No. 57. Petitioner was ordered to file an additional report from Dr. Gershwin addressing those issues. Id. Medical records documenting petitioner’s platelet counts from December 2009 through 2011 had not been filed; petitioner advised that he had filed all records received but they did not include any platelet counts between December 2009 and June of 2011. Id. Respondent noted that Petitioner’s Exhibit 102 contained records from “Catholic Healthcare West” and suggested that there may be additional records from that facility that had

3 This case was reassigned to me on January 13, 2016. ECF No. 37.

2 not yet been filed. Id. Petitioner was given 90 days to secure and file the missing medical records. Id. at 1-2. Petitioner’s counsel was directed to consult with his client to determine if the relevant records were available through another facility. Id. at 2.

Petitioner filed additional medical records on April 28, 2017. Pet. Ex. 133, ECF No. 61. These records did not include information regarding petitioner’s platelet counts from 2009 through June 2, 2011. See id.

Petitioner filed a status report on May 8, 2017, advising that, despite requests to various healthcare providers, she had been unable to locate lab results documenting petitioner’s platelet counts between 2009 and 2011. Pet. S.R. at 1, ECF No. 62. Petitioner filed a fourth report from Dr. Gershwin and medical literature on June 12, 2017. Pet. Ex. 134-39, ECF No. 64.

A status conference was held on August 22, 2017, during which I emphasized that petitioner’s bloodwork from 2009 to 2011 was important to the ultimate outcome of this matter. Scheduling Order at 1, ECF No. 65. I encouraged petitioner’s counsel to continue his efforts to locate these lab results. Id. Petitioner filed additional medical records in September and October of 2017. Pet. Ex. 140-41, ECF No. 66-67. These records showed that petitioner had an abnormally low platelet count on October 20, 2009, when she was not pregnant. Pet. Ex. 140 at 67. These medical records contained no reference to petitioner’s platelet counts in 2010 or 2011.

Respondent filed supplemental expert reports from Dr. McKenzie and Dr. Forsthuber on April 18, 2018. Resp. Ex. C-D, ECF No. 77.

A status conference was held on May 15, 2018. I noted respondent’s experts’ opinions that petitioner’s low platelet count in October 2009 indicated that she had ITP unrelated to pregnancy. Scheduling Order at 1, ECF No. 79. I further noted that Dr.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Moberly v. Secretary of Health & Human Services
592 F.3d 1315 (Federal Circuit, 2010)
Doe v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
601 F.3d 1349 (Federal Circuit, 2010)
United States v. United States Gypsum Co.
333 U.S. 364 (Supreme Court, 1948)
Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
509 U.S. 579 (Supreme Court, 1993)
General Electric Co. v. Joiner
522 U.S. 136 (Supreme Court, 1997)
Broekelschen v. Secretary of Health & Human Services
618 F.3d 1339 (Federal Circuit, 2010)
Walther v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
485 F.3d 1146 (Federal Circuit, 2007)
Althen v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
418 F.3d 1274 (Federal Circuit, 2005)
Locane v. Secretary of Health & Human Services
685 F.3d 1375 (Federal Circuit, 2012)
Paluck v. Secretary of Health & Human Services
786 F.3d 1373 (Federal Circuit, 2015)
Moriarty v. Secretary of Health & Human Services
844 F.3d 1322 (Federal Circuit, 2016)
Campbell v. Secretary of Health & Human Services
69 Fed. Cl. 775 (Federal Claims, 2006)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Allard v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/allard-v-secretary-of-health-and-human-services-uscfc-2020.