Tessa Needham, et al. v. Merck & Company, Inc., et al.

Charlotte, North Carolina, personal injury lawyers represented the Plaintiff who sued vaccine related injuries.



compensation program for vaccine-related injuries. Generally, a person claiming

injury from certain vaccines must first pursue this statutory remedy before suing a vaccine

manufacturer. 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-11(a)(2)(A). To do so, a claimant must file a petition in

the Court of Federal Claims within 36 months of the onset of the first symptom of vaccine-

related injury or the injury's "significant aggravation.” Id. § 300aa-16(a)(2).



The three Plaintiffs here filed petitions in the Court of Federal Claims after receiving

the Gardasil vaccine, which prevents strains of human papillomavirus.1 Plaintiffs

conceded that their petitions were untimely but sought to equitably toll the Vaccine Act's

limitations period. The special master who adjudicated the petitions agreed that they were

untimely and dismissed them.



Plaintiffs then sued Merck & Co. and its affiliate, Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC,

(together, "Merck”), both of which manufacture Gardasil, in the Western District of North

Carolina, the forum for multi-district litigation arising from alleged Gardasil-related

injuries. The district court dismissed the complaints because Plaintiffs failed to file timely

Vaccine Act petitions.



Plaintiffs appeal that ruling, along with two others the district court made that apply

to all cases within the multi-district litigation: a ruling on a motion for partial judgment on

the pleadings and a ruling rejecting a constitutional challenge to the Vaccine Act.

Timely participation in the Vaccine Act compensation program is a prerequisite to bringing a tort suit; courts faced with vaccine-related tort suits may not consider whether a petition under the Act was timely once the Vaccine Act process yields a timeliness finding/



Affirmed