Filed: Mar. 23, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 23, 2018
Summary: Unpublished DECISION 1 . NORA BETH DORSEY , Chief Special Master . On June 2, 2017, Thomas Hettenbach ("petitioner") filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. 300aa-10, et seq. 2 (the "Vaccine Act" or "Program"). 3 Petitioner alleges that he suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration ("SIRVA") caused in fact by the measles, mumps, and rubella ("MMR") vaccine he received on April 14, 2016. Petition at 1. The inf
Summary: Unpublished DECISION 1 . NORA BETH DORSEY , Chief Special Master . On June 2, 2017, Thomas Hettenbach ("petitioner") filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. 300aa-10, et seq. 2 (the "Vaccine Act" or "Program"). 3 Petitioner alleges that he suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration ("SIRVA") caused in fact by the measles, mumps, and rubella ("MMR") vaccine he received on April 14, 2016. Petition at 1. The info..
More
Unpublished
DECISION1.
NORA BETH DORSEY, Chief Special Master.
On June 2, 2017, Thomas Hettenbach ("petitioner") filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq.2 (the "Vaccine Act" or "Program").3 Petitioner alleges that he suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration ("SIRVA") caused in fact by the measles, mumps, and rubella ("MMR") vaccine he received on April 14, 2016. Petition at 1. The information in the record does not show entitlement to an award under the Program.
On Mach 23, 2018, petitioner moved for a decision dismissing his petition, acknowledging that insufficient evidence exists to demonstrate entitlement to compensation. (ECF No. 24). Petitioner indicated in his motion that "[a]n investigation of the facts and science supporting this case has demonstrated to petitioner that he will be unable to prove that he is entitled to compensation in the Vaccine Program." Id. at ¶ 1. Petitioner further indicated that he "understands that a decision by the Chief Special Master dismissing his petition will result in a judgment against him. He has been advised that such a judgment will end all of his rights in the Vaccine Program." Id. at ¶ 3.
To receive compensation under the Program, petitioner must prove either 1) that he suffered a "Table Injury" — i.e., an injury falling within the Vaccine Injury Table — corresponding to a covered vaccine, or 2) that he suffered an injury that was actually caused by a covered vaccine. See §§ 13(a)(1)(A) and 11(c)(1). Examination of the record does not disclose any evidence that petitioner suffered a "Table Injury." Further, the record does not contain a medical expert's opinion or any other persuasive evidence indicating that petitioner's alleged injury was vaccine-caused.
Under the Vaccine Act, a petitioner may not be awarded compensation based on the petitioner's claims alone. Rather, the petition must be supported by either the medical records or by a medical opinion. § 13(a)(1). In this case, the record does not contain medical records or a medical opinion sufficient to demonstrate that petitioner was injured by a vaccine. For these reasons, and in accordance with § 12(d)(3)(A), petitioner's claim for compensation is DENIED and this case is DISMISSED for insufficient proof. The Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
