Richardson v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims·Decided May 5, 2016·No. 15-366·Unpublished

Opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 15-0366V Filed: February 4, 2016

**************************** BRADLEY J. RICHARDSON, * * Petitioner, * v. * Finding of Fact; Six Month Requirement; * Special Processing Unit (“SPU”) SECRETARY OF HEALTH * AND HUMAN SERVICES, * * Respondent. * * **************************** Isaiah R. Kalinowski, Maglio Christopher & Toale, PA, Washington, DC, for petitioner. Jennifer L. Reynaud, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

ORDER and RULING ON FACTS1

Dorsey, Chief Special Master:

On April 10, 2015, Bradley J. Richardson (“petitioner”) filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et. seq, (the “Vaccine Act” or “Program”). The petition alleges that petitioner developed Guillain-Barré syndrome (“GBS”) as a result of receiving an influenza (“flu”) vaccine on November 1, 2012. Petition at 1-2. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit (“SPU”).

I. Procedural History

On June 10, 2015, an initial status conference was held with the staff attorney managing this case. During the status conference, it was noted that the records filed by petitioner had not established that he suffered the residual effects of his injury for more than six months. Petitioner was ordered to file the additional records regarding the six month requirement as well as any outstanding records within 45 days. See Order, dated June 12, 2015. 1 Because this unpublished order and ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the undersigned intends to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims'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). 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, the undersigned agrees that the identified material fits within this definition, the undersigned will redact such material from public access.

1 On August 26, 2015, and September 23, 2015, petitioner filed records from his former employer and affidavits/personal statements from family, friends and coworkers to establish that he suffered the residual effects of his injury for more than six months. Also on September 23, 2015, petitioner filed a status report stating that a follow-up appointment with his former neurologist, Dr. Chennu, had been scheduled in order for Dr. Chennu to assess petitioner’s neurologic status. Petitioner stated that he would file those records as soon as possible, and otherwise certified the record as complete.

On November 9, 2015, respondent filed a status report stating that she “leaves it to the Chief Special Master to determine whether the allegations of petitioner, his associates and family members are credible and reliable, and whether a preponderance of the evidence establishes that he suffered the sequella of his alleged vaccine-injury for more than six months.” Respondent’s Status Report dated Nov. 9, 2015.

On December 10, 2015, petitioner filed the records from his November 20, 2015 appointment with Dr. Chennu. Petitioner subsequently filed his Statement of Completion on December 10, 2015.

II. Fact History

On November 1, 2012, petitioner received a trivalent influenza (“flu”) vaccine at the office of his employer, CD Hartnett Company, in Fort Worth, Texas. Petitioner’s Exhibit (“Pet. Ex.) 1 at 2; Pet. Ex. 6 at 1-3. Petitioner alleges that several days later, he began to notice a tingling sensation in his hands and feet, which quickly progressed to complete numbness in his lower extremities. Petition at 2, ¶4. He states that his lower legs below the knee “locked up” and one side of his face became similarly affected. Id.

On November 10, 2012, petitioner presented to the Emergency Department (“ED”) of Harris Methodist Hospital with complaints of tingling in his hands and feet for the past four days. Pet. Ex. 2 at 550. He complained that he “took a flu shot and hadn’t felt right since.” Id. Petitioner underwent a CT scan of his head which did not reveal any acute intracranial process. Id.

Petitioner returned to the ED on November 12, 2012, again complaining of numbness and tingling bilaterally to his hands, feet, and calves. Pet. Ex. 2 at 100. Upon examination, it was noted that petitioner was experiencing numbness and facial asymmetry (mild right sided facial droop). Id. at 101. Petitioner was admitted for additional testing and observation.

On November 13, 2012, after a workup and laboratory testing, Dr. Dinesh Bhambhvani documented that petitioner’s symptoms were “consistent with Guillain Barre syndrome associated with right facial neuropathy, most likely etiology is flu vaccine.” Pet. Ex. 2 at 113. Initially, Dr. Bhambhvani noted that petitioner’s peripheral symptoms were mostly sensory and that there was no need for IVIG or plasmapheresis.

2 The next day, Dr. Mehnazi Roshani ordered that petitioner be administered one dose of IVIG and ordered an MRI of petitioner’s brain. Id. at 118.

Cerebral spinal fluid (“CSF”) testing revealed elevated red and white blood cells, as well as an elevated protein count. Pet. Ex. 2 at 514. The elevated protein level was viewed as “abnormal and consistent with Guillain-Barré syndrome associated with right facial neuropathy,” and IVIG treatments were continued for a total of five days. Id. at 142-50. Dr. Bhambhvani noted that the “[m]ost likely etiology is flu vaccine.” Id. Petitioner was discharged on November 20, 2012, with a diagnosis of GBS, numbness and tingling, acute back pain and hypertension. Id. at 104.

Following his discharge from the hospital, on December 7, 2012, petitioner presented to Dr. Yamimi Chennu of Tarrant Neurology Consultants, who reviewed petitioner’s medical history. Dr. Chennu noted that petitioner continued to complain of numbness, tingling and a feeling of cool sensation involving all limbs. Petitioner also complained that he continued to feel weakness, but that he was slowly making progress. Dr. Chennu noted that other than a venous anomaly in the left cerebellar hemisphere, petitioner’s brain MRI was unremarkable. Dr. Chennu scheduled EMG/NCS diagnostic testing and referred petitioner for physical therapy. Pet. Ex. 3 at 8-10. Dr. Chennu noted that he could not release petitioner back to work until he was cleared from physical therapy. Id. at 10.

Four weeks later, petitioner returned to Dr. Chennu for a follow-up visit. Pet. Ex. 3 at 12. Dr. Chennu noted that petitioner had not yet been released from physical therapy, but that he reported improvement since his last visit. Id. Petitioner stated that he was continuing to experience fatigue and generalized weakness. Id.

Petitioner’s next appointment with Dr. Chennu was on February 6, 2013. Petitioner reported overall improvement, although he stated that he was still experiencing numbness and tingling, mostly involving his feet. Pet. Ex. 3 at 15.

In his affidavit, petitioner stated that he was unable to return to his job as a supervisor at work for three and a half months, which placed him and his family in severe financial straits. Pet. Ex. 8 at 2. He stated that he convinced his doctors and his employer to allow him to work, if even only a light duty restriction. Petitioner did return to work in February 2013, but he did not return to his previous active job duties and had to remain seated for most of the day. Id.

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

Richardson v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, (uscfc 2016).

Richardson v. Secretary of Health and Human Services (Richardson v. Secretary of Health and Human Services) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related