Gardasil Lawsuits: We Are Not Accepting New Claims

Why we are not accepting Gardasil claims

For most people now searching for a Gardasil lawyer, the deadline to begin a claim has already passed. That is not a comment on whether you were injured. It is a consequence of how vaccine injury claims work, and the timeline is unusually short and unusually strict.

Why vaccine claims are different

Vaccine injury claims do not start in an ordinary courtroom.

Under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, claims involving covered vaccines generally have to go first through the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, a federal no-fault system. The HPV vaccine is a covered vaccine. A civil lawsuit against the manufacturer is generally only available after that program process has run its course.

That structure has two consequences that catch people out.

The deadlines are short. A petition generally must be filed within a few years of the first symptom of the alleged injury, and the window for a death claim is shorter still. These deadlines are firm and they are not extended because you did not know about them.

The clock runs from first symptom, not from diagnosis. People frequently do not connect a symptom to a vaccine until years later, by which point the window has closed. That is the single most common reason a Gardasil claim cannot be brought today.

Where the civil litigation stands

Claims that cleared the program process were consolidated into federal multidistrict litigation, alleging that the manufacturer failed to adequately warn about certain risks.

That litigation has been proceeding for years and is in a late posture. Firms across the country closed intake some time ago, because the underlying program deadlines had already run for the population of potential claimants.

The practical effect: almost everyone searching for a Gardasil lawyer today is outside the window. Firms still advertising for these cases are, in many instances, advertising for claims that can no longer be filed.

The narrow situations where it may still be worth asking

A small number of circumstances can change the analysis. If any of these describe you, put the deadline question to a lawyer promptly rather than assuming either way:

• First symptom onset was recent, within the last two to three years, even if the vaccination was long ago
• The injured person is a minor, since limitations rules for minors differ and can extend the window in some circumstances
• A death occurred recently and is alleged to relate to an earlier injury
• A petition was already filed in the program and you are trying to understand what happens next

If none of those apply, the honest answer is that the window has almost certainly closed, and no firm can reopen it.

What we are taking

Robert Law Group continues to handle pharmaceutical, medical device, and consumer product litigation. These are open:

• Roblox sexual abuse claims
• Social media addiction and adolescent mental health
• Institutional sexual abuse
• Silica exposure and silicosis
• Product liability generally, including recalled consumer and children’s products

See the full mass torts practice.

Why we are telling you this instead of taking your call

Because a firm that signs you up for a claim it knows is time-barred is not helping you.

The most useful thing we can do on this page is give you an accurate answer quickly, so that if you have a viable claim in a different litigation you find it now rather than after months of calls.