Goodson v. Secretary of Health and Human Services ( 2020 )


Menu:
  •     In the United States Court of Federal Claims
    OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
    No. 19-895V
    UNPUBLISHED
    MAXFEL GOODSON,                                             Chief Special Master Corcoran
    Petitioner,                            Filed: November 12, 2020
    v.
    Special Processing Unit (SPU);
    SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND                                     Damages Decision Based on Proffer;
    HUMAN SERVICES,                                             Influenza (Flu) Vaccine; Shoulder
    Injury Related to Vaccine
    Respondent.                            Administration (SIRVA)
    Andrew Donald Downing, Van Cott & Talamante, PLLC, Phoenix, AZ, for petitioner.
    Traci R. Patton, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
    DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES 1
    On June 19, 2019, Maxfel Goodson filed a petition for compensation under the
    National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq. 2 (the
    “Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleges that that she suffered a left-sided shoulder injury related
    to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) as a result of her October 4, 2018 influenza (“flu”)
    vaccination. Petition at 1, 4-5. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of
    the Office of Special Masters.
    On November 12, 2020, a ruling on entitlement was issued, finding Petitioner
    entitled to compensation for SIRVA. On November 10, 2020, Respondent filed a proffer
    on award of compensation (“Proffer”) indicating Petitioner should be awarded
    $102,500.00. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report Conceding Entitlement to Compensation
    and Proffer on Damages at 6. In the Proffer, Respondent represented that Petitioner
    1
    Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am
    required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in accordance with the E-
    Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of Electronic
    Government Services). This means the decision will be available to anyone with access to the
    internet. In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), Petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to redact
    medical or other information, the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy.
    If, upon review, I agree that the identified material fits within this definition, I will redact such material from
    public access.
    2
    National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755. Hereinafter, for ease
    of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa
    (2012).
    agrees with the proffered award.
    Id. Based on the
    record as a whole, I find that Petitioner
    is entitled to an award as stated in the Proffer.
    Pursuant to the terms stated in the Proffer, I award Petitioner a lump sum
    payment of $102,500.00 in the form of a check payable to Petitioner. This amount
    represents compensation for all damages that would be available under § 15(a).
    The clerk of the court is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this
    decision. 3
    IT IS SO ORDERED.
    s/Brian H. Corcoran
    Brian H. Corcoran
    Chief Special Master
    3
    Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment can be expedited by the parties’ joint filing of notice
    renouncing the right to seek review.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 19-895

Judges: Brian H. Corcoran

Filed Date: 12/15/2020

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 12/15/2020