UNPUBLISHED

DECISION1

THOMAS L. GOWEN, Special Master.

On January 31, 2019, Amy Moreno ("petitioner") filed a petition in the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.2 Petition (ECF No. 1). Petitioner alleged that as a result of receiving the Tetanus, diphtheria and pertussis ("Tdap") and influenza ("flu") vaccines on February 11, 2016, she suffered Guillain-Barré Syndrome ("GBS"). Petition at Preamble. The information in the record does not establish entitlement to compensation.

On February 19, 2020, petitioner file a motion dismissing petition. Petitioner's Motion ("Pet. Mot.") (ECF No. 22). Petitioner notified petitioner's counsel that there was no additional evidence to demonstrate that her alleged vaccine injury lasted for at least six months. Pet. Mot. at ¶ 1. Petitioner stated that to proceed further would be unreasonable and would waste the resources of the Court, Respondent and the Vaccine Program. Id. at ¶ 4. Petitioner understands that a decision by the special master dismissing her petition will result in a judgment against her and that such a judgment will end all of her rights in the Vaccine Program. Id. at ¶ 3. Petitioner understands that she may apply for fees and costs once the case is dismissed and judgment is entered against her. Id. at ¶ 4. Respondent expressly reserves the right to question the good faith and reasonable basis of this claim and to oppose, if appropriate, petitioner's application for fees and costs. Respondent otherwise does not oppose the motion. Id. at ¶ 5. Petitioner has not determined whether she will elect to reject the Vaccine Program judgment and elect to file a civil action. Id. at ¶ 6.

To receive compensation in the Vaccine Program, petitioner has the burden of proving either: (1) that petitioner suffered a "Table Injury," i.e., an injury beginning within a specified period of time following receipt of a corresponding vaccine listed on the Vaccine Injury Table (a "Table injury") or (2) that petitioner suffered an injury that was caused-in-fact by a covered vaccine. §§ 13(a)(1)(A); 11(c)(1). Additionally, a petitioner must show that she experienced the residual effects of her alleged injury for more than six months, or that her injury required a hospitalization involving surgical intervention. § 11(c)(1)(D)(i) and (ii). Moreover, under the Vaccine Act, the Vaccine Program may not award compensation based on petitioner's claims alone. Rather, petitioner must support the claim with either medical records or the opinion of a competent medical expert. § 13(a)(1). In this case, petitioner is alleging she suffered an injury that was caused-in-fact by covered vaccines, however, she has not provided sufficient proof establishing that the residual effects of her alleged injury lasted for six months or longer, or that she underwent surgical intervention during a hospitalization.

Accordingly, petitioner's motion is GRANTED. This matter is DISMISSED for insufficient proof. The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly.3

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Motion for Dismissal Decision; Tetanus, diphtheria and pertussis ("Tdap) vaccine; Influenza ("flu") vaccine; Guillain-Barré Syndrome.