Filing
3 Sep 2025
3 Sep 2025
C/17/190788 · District Court of the Northern Netherlands, Leeuwarden
Bourla — Comirnaty is safe and no batch was recalled for safety
Albert Bourla (defence)
Defence filing · the court has not ruled on these claims
In 30 seconds
The rejoinder (final written answer) of Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla, with exhibits. He adopts the State's rejoinder and says the claimants' studies are flawed. He denies any difference between batches, says no damage is shown, and says the proposed experts should not be heard.
Cheat sheet
- Bourla asks the court to ignore three huge exhibits (one over 4,000 pages, an untranslated German video, a book never received).
- He says the coronavirus and the pandemic are real and that Comirnaty, Pfizer's Covid-19 vaccine, helped curb it.
- He says differences in reported side effects by batch reflect how and to whom batches were used, not quality.
- He says, as far as he knows, batch EM0477 was never suspended and no Comirnaty batch was recalled for safety anywhere.
- He says the claimants meet no threshold for damages and that the proposed experts are not impartial.
- Exhibits include the State's rejoinder and the 20 August 2025 court order on the expert-hearing request.
Key passages · underlined
the coronavirus, COVID-19 and the COVID-19 pandemic do exist; the COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective; and there is (therefore) no question of deception, genocide or any other (intended) modification of humankind through the COVID-19 vaccines.
This contravenes the duty to provide guidance. Neither Bourla nor the court can be expected to search for themselves for possible evidence to support a claim
The fact that more or fewer adverse reactions are reported for different batches of vaccines can, for example, be explained by the fact that (i) some batches were not used, or were used very little
has not been suspended in the Netherlands (nor elsewhere). Nor have any batches of Comirnaty been recalled anywhere in the world on safety grounds.
Every defendant denies the claims, and the court has not ruled on them. Allegations are the claimants' pleaded positions, quoted as theirs. This is analysis and commentary, not legal advice. Interest of Justice is not a party to the case.