Breaking NewsLaw.com and associated brands will be offline for scheduled maintenance Friday Feb. 26 9 PM US EST to Saturday Feb. 27 6 AM EST. We apologize for the inconvenience.

 
X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Click here for the full text of this decision FACTS:This suit was filed in state court on behalf of children who suffered neurological damage allegedly caused by vaccines containing Thimerosal that in turn contained mercury. The case was removed to federal district court. That court denied the plaintiffs’ motion to remand and then dismissed all claims against all defendants, relying on the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986. HOLDING:The court affirms the district court’s denial of the Holders’ motion to remand; affirms the district court’s dismissal of the Holders’ claims against Gregory S. Maranto, M.D. and Rush Medical Group, P.A.; affirms the district court’s dismissal of the claims against the vaccine defendants; but reverses the district court’s dismissal of the claims against Eli Lilly and Co., Sigma-Aldrich Inc., and Spectrum Chemical Manufacturing Corp. and remands only the claims that those defendants manufactured, marketed, designed or distributed Thimerosal. The Holders concede that they have not filed a petition seeking compensation for the injuries alleged in this action with the United States Court of Federal Claims. The question is whether they were required to, and if so, whether all their claims against all defendants are “against a vaccine administrator or manufacturer.” The Vaccine Act requires that claims “for a vaccine-related injury or death” must first be brought in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. Suit in state and federal courts is barred unless and until there has been compliance with �300aa-11(a)(2)(A) of the act. If a civil action barred under �300aa-11(a)(2)(A) is brought in state or federal court, the court is required to dismiss the action. The non-diverse defendants who allegedly administered vaccines and the vaccine defendants who allegedly manufactured vaccines come within Vaccine Act �300aa-11(a), as this court held in McDonal v. Abbott Laboratories, 408 F.3d 177 (5th Cir. 2005). But Moss v. Merck & Co., 381 F.3d 501 (5th Cir. 2004), held that Thimerosal is a component of a vaccine, not a vaccine, and that claims against Thimerosal manufacturers are not governed by the Vaccine Act. There is no requirement that redress for vaccine-related injuries against Thimerosal manufacturers be pursued in accordance with �300aa-11(a). The Holders’ allegations in their complaint do not distinguish between the vaccine defendants and the Thimerosal defendants. The Holders alleged that each defendant was both a Thimerosal and a vaccine manufacturer or supplier. Because the Vaccine Act bars all claims against the non-diverse defendants but not claims against the diverse defendants regarding the manufacture, marketing and distribution of Thimerosal, the district court did not err in denying the Holders’ motion to remand. The district court had subject matter jurisdiction because removal was proper and there was diversity jurisdiction. The court did not err in dismissing the Holders’ claims against the non-diverse defendants who administered vaccines. The vaccine defendants did not manufacture or distribute Thimerosal separate and apart from vaccines and that, in light of McDonal, dismissal as to those defendants was proper. The Vaccine Act does not bar the Holders’ claims against the Thimerosal Defendants, and the district court erred in dismissing the Holders’ claims against those defendants on that basis. OPINION:Owen, J.; Benavides, Stewart and Owen, JJ.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 1 article* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?

 
 

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.