Bruno v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 15-1537V Filed: September 19, 2016 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * UNPUBLISHED CATHY BRUNO, parent and natural guardian* of C.B., a minor, * * * Special Master Hamilton-Fieldman Petitioner, * * Joint Stipulation on Damages; v. * Human Papillomavirus Vaccine; * Left Cranial Nerve VI Palsy. SECRETARY OF HEALTH * AND HUMAN SERVICES, * * Respondent. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Jeffrey A. Golvash, Brennan, Robins & Daley, P.C., Pittsburgh, PA, for Petitioner. Heather L. Pearlman, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. DECISION1 On December 17, 2015, Cathy Bruno (“Petitioner”) filed a petition on behalf of her minor child, C.B., for compensation pursuant to the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.2 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 to -34 (2012). Petitioner alleged that as a result of a human papillomavirus (“HPV”) vaccine administered on July 11, 2014, the minor suffered left cranial nerve VI palsy. See Stipulation for Award at ¶ 2, 4, filed Sept. 19, 2016. Petitioner further alleged that the minor suffered residual effects of this injury for more than six months. Id. at ¶ 4. 1 Because this decision contains a reasoned explanation for the undersigned’s action in this case, the undersigned intends to post this decision on the website of the United States Court of Federal Claims, in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002, codified as amended at 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012). As provided by Vaccine Rule 18(b), each party has 14 days within which to request redaction “of any information furnished by that party: (1) that is a trade secret or commercial or financial in substance and is privileged or confidential; or (2) that includes medical files or similar files, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy.” Vaccine Rule 18(b). 2 The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program is set forth in Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755, codified as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 to -34 (2006) (Vaccine Act or the Act). All citations in this decision to individual sections of the Vaccine Act are to 42 U.S.C.A. § 300aa. 1 On September 19, 2016, the parties filed a stipulation in which they state that a decision should be entered awarding compensation to Petitioner. Respondent denies that the HPV vaccination caused C.B.’s left cranial nerve VI palsy or any other injury, and further denies that C.B. experienced residual effects of this injury for more than six months. Id. at ¶ 6. Nevertheless, the parties agree to the joint stipulation, attached hereto as Appendix A. The undersigned finds the stipulation reasonable and adopts it as the decision of the Court in awarding damages, on the terms set forth therein. The parties stipulate that Petitioner shall receive the following compensation: 1) A lump sum of $3,704.67, representing compensation for full satisfaction of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Medicaid lien, in the form of a check payable jointly to petitioner and Department of Human Services P.O. Box 8486 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105-8486 Attn: Michelle Walfred Re: CIS #730350924 Petitioner agrees to endorse this payment to the Department of Human Services; and 2) A lump sum payment of $50,000.00, in the form of a check payable to petitioner, Cathy Bruno, as guardian/conservator of C.B.’s estate. 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a)(1)(B). These amounts represents compensation for all damages that would be available under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). Id. at ¶ 8. The undersigned approves the requested amounts for Petitioner’s compensation. Accordingly, an award should be made consistent with the stipulation. In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the clerk of the court SHALL ENTER JUDGMENT in accordance with the terms of the parties’ stipulation.3 IT IS SO ORDERED. s/ Lisa Hamilton-Fieldman Lisa Hamilton-Fieldman Special Master 3 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment is expedited by the parties’ joint filing of notice renouncing the right to seek review. 2