DocketNumber: 15-205
Judges: Nora Beth Dorsey
Filed Date: 3/23/2016
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 4/18/2021
In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 15-0205V Filed: November 19, 2015 UNPUBLISHED **************************** DAVID G. SMITH, * * Petitioner, * Joint Stipulation on Damages; * Influenza (“Flu”) Vaccine; Shoulder * Injury Related to Vaccine Administration SECRETARY OF HEALTH * (“SIRVA”); Special Processing Unit AND HUMAN SERVICES, * (“SPU”) * Respondent. * * **************************** Leah VaSahnja Durant, Law Offices of Leah V. Durant, Washington, DC, for petitioner. Ryan Daniel Pyles, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent. DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1 Dorsey, Chief Special Master: On March 2, 2015, petitioner 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 he suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) as a result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccine he received on November 8, 2013. Petition at 1; Stipulation, filed 11/19/2015, ¶ 4. Petitioner further alleges that he experienced the residual effects of this injury for more than six months. Stipulation¶ 4. “Respondent denies that the flu immunization is the cause of petitioner’s alleged SIRVA and/or any other injury.” Stipulation, ¶ 6. Nevertheless, on November 19, 2015, the parties filed the attached joint stipulation (attached as Appendix A), stating that a decision should be entered awarding compensation. The undersigned finds the stipulation reasonable and adopts it as the decision of the Court in awarding damages, on the terms set forth therein. 1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the undersigned intends to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-347, § 205,116 Stat. 2899
, 2913 (codified as amended at44 U.S.C. § 3501
note (2006)). 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, the undersigned agrees that the identified material fits within this definition, the undersigned 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). 1 The parties stipulated that petitioner shall receive the following compensation: A lump sum of $107,500.00, in the form of a check payable to petitioner. Stipulation, ¶ 8. This amount represents compensation for all items of damages that would be available under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). Id. The undersigned approves the requested amount for petitioner’s compensation. In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the clerk of the court is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this decision.3 IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Nora Beth Dorsey Nora Beth Dorsey 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