Marshall v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 15-1215V Filed: June 29, 2016 UNPUBLISHED **************************** CHRISTINA MARSHALL, * * Petitioner, * Damages Decision Based on Proffer; * Influenza Vaccine (“Flu Vaccine”); * Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Administration (“SIRVA”); AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Special Processing Unit (“SPU”) * Respondent. * * **************************** Amber Wilson, Maglio, Christopher and Toale, PA, (DC), Washington, DC, for petitioner. Jennifer Reynaud, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC for respondent. DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1 Dorsey, Chief Special Master: On October 16, 2015, Christina Marshall (“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” or “Program”). Petitioner alleges that she suffered a right shoulder injury causally related to the influenza vaccination she received on October 6, 2014. Petition at ¶¶ 2-3, 18. Petitioner further alleges that her injury lasted more than six months, that she received the vaccination in the United States, and that neither she nor any other person has brought an action for her injury, alleged as vaccine caused. Id. at ¶¶ 2, 19, 21. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters. On March 4, 2016, the undersigned issued a ruling on entitlement, finding petitioner entitled to compensation. On June 29, 2016, respondent filed a proffer on 1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the undersigned intends to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website,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. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of Electronic Government Services). 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. 2National 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). award of compensation (“Proffer”) indicating petitioner should be awarded $111,462.21. Proffer at 1. In the Proffer, respondent represented that petitioner agrees with the proffered award. Id. Based on the record as a whole, the undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to an award as stated in the Proffer. Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Proffer, the undersigned awards petitioner a lump sum payment of $111,462.21 in the form of a check payable to petitioner, Christina Marshall. This amount represents compensation for all damages that would be available under § 300aa-15(a). 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 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS CHRISTINA MARSHALL, Petitioner, v. No. 15-1215V Chief Special Master Dorsey SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND ECF HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. RESPONDENT’S PROFFER ON AWARD OF COMPENSATION On October 16, 2015, Christina Marshall (“petitioner”) filed a petition for compensation (“Petition”) under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 to - 34 (“Vaccine Act” or “Act”), as amended. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report, filed on March 3, 2016, conceded that petitioner is entitled to compensation. In light of respondent’s concession, on March 4, 2016, the special master found petitioner entitled to compensation. I. Items of Compensation Based upon the evidence of record, respondent proffers that petitioner should be awarded $111,462.21, which represents all elements of compensation to which petitioner would be entitled under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). Petitioner agrees. II. Form of the Award Respondent recommends that the compensation provided to petitioner should be made through a lump sum payment of $111,462.21 in the form of a check payable to petitioner. 1 Petitioner agrees. 1 Should petitioner die prior to entry of judgment, the parties reserve the right to move the Court for appropriate relief. In particular, respondent would oppose any award for future medical expenses, future pain and suffering, and future lost wages. 1 Petitioner is a competent adult. Evidence of guardianship is not required in this case. Respectfully submitted, BENJAMIN C. MIZER Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General RUPA BHATTACHARYYA Director Torts Branch, Civil Division CATHARINE E. REEVES Acting Deputy Director Torts Branch, Civil Division GLENN A. MACLEOD Senior Trial Counsel Torts Branch, Civil Division s/ Jennifer L. Reynaud JENNIFER L. REYNAUD Trial Attorney Torts Branch, Civil Division U.S. Department of Justice P.O. Box 146 Benjamin Franklin Station Washington, D.C. 20044-0146 Tel: (202) 305-1586 Date: June 29, 2016 2