Banks v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 16-902V Filed: June 16, 2017 UNPUBLISHED **************************** JERRY BANKS, * * Petitioner, * Joint Stipulation on Damages; v. * Influenza (Flu) Vaccine; Tetanus, * Diphtheria, acellular Pertussis (Tdap) SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Vaccine; Guillain-Barré Syndrome AND HUMAN SERVICES, * (GBS); Special Processing Unit (SPU) * Respondent. * * **************************** Alison Haskins, Maglio, Christopher, and Toale, PA (FL), Sarasota, FL, for petitioner. Sarah Duncan, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent. DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1 Dorsey, Chief Special Master: On July 29, 2016, 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 alleged that he suffered Guillain-Barré Syndrome (“GBS”) after receiving a tetanus, diphtheria, acellular pertussis (“Tdap”) vaccination and an influenza vaccination on October 14, 2015. Petition at 1, ¶¶ 1, 12; see also Stipulation, filed June 16, 2017, at ¶¶ 1-2, 4. Petitioner further alleged that he received the vaccination in the United States, suffered the effects of his injury for more than six months, and has not brought an action nor received compensation for his injury, alleged as vaccine caused. Petition at ¶¶ 1, 13-16-17; see also Stipulation at ¶¶ 3-5. “Respondent denies that the Tdap and influenza immunizations are the cause of petitioner’s alleged GBS or any other injury or his current condition.” Stipulation at ¶ 6. 1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the undersigned intends to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website,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). Nevertheless, on June 16, 2017, the parties filed the attached joint stipulation, 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. Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Stipulation, the undersigned awards the following compensation: A lump sum of $325,000.00 in the form of a check payable to petitioner. Stipulation at ¶ 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