VICP Registry Case Source Bundle Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_13-vv-00432 Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_13-vv-00432 Petitioner: Robert M. Curry Filed: 2014-04-07 Decided: 2014-04-28 Vaccine: DTaP Vaccination date: 2010-06-14 Condition: persistent muscular and joint pain and disability Outcome: compensated Award amount USD: 130000 AI-assisted case summary: Robert M. Curry filed a petition on April 7, 2014, alleging that he received a Diphtheria-Tetanus-acellular-Pertussis (DTaP) vaccine on June 14, 2010. Mr. Curry alleged that he subsequently suffered an allergic autoimmune reaction manifesting as persistent muscular and joint pain and disability, which he claimed was caused by the vaccination. The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, denied that the DTaP vaccine caused Mr. Curry's alleged injuries or any other injury or disability. The parties reached a joint stipulation for damages, which Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey adopted as the decision of the court. The stipulation awarded Mr. Curry a lump sum of $130,000.00, payable to him, as compensation for all available damages under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). The court approved this amount, and judgment was to be entered in accordance with the stipulation, as both parties renounced the right to seek review. Thomas K. Brown represented the petitioner, and Claudia B. Gangi represented the respondent. The public decision does not describe the specific onset of symptoms, medical tests performed, treatments received, or the specific mechanism of causation. Theory of causation field: Petitioner Robert M. Curry alleged that a DTaP vaccine administered on June 14, 2010, caused an allergic autoimmune reaction manifesting as persistent muscular and joint pain and disability. Respondent denied causation. The parties filed a joint stipulation for damages, which Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey adopted. The stipulation awarded petitioner a lump sum of $130,000.00 for all damages. The public decision does not detail the specific theory of causation, medical experts, or the mechanism by which the vaccine allegedly caused the injury. The attorneys involved were Thomas K. Brown for the petitioner and Claudia B. Gangi for the respondent. The decision date was April 28, 2014. Public staged source text: ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_13-vv-00432-0 Date issued/filed: 2014-04-28 Pages: 7 Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 04/07/2014) regarding 22 DECISION of Special Master Signed by Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey. (tlj) Copy to parties. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:13-vv-00432-UNJ Document 27 Filed 04/28/14 Page 1 of 7 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 13-432V Filed: April 7, 2014 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * UNPUBLISHED ROBERT M. CURRY, * * Special Master Dorsey Petitioner, * * Joint Stipulation on Damages; v. * Diphtheria-Tetanus-acellular- * Pertussis (DTaP) vaccine; muscle SECRETARY OF HEALTH * and joint pain. AND HUMAN SERVICES, * * Respondent. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Thomas K. Brown, The Brown Law Firm, L.L.L.P, Houston, TX, for petitioner. Claudia B. Gangi, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent. DECISION1 On June 28, 2013, Robert M. Curry (“petitioner”) filed a petition pursuant to the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.2 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 to -34 (2006). Petitioner alleges that he received a Diphtheria-Tetanus-acellular-Pertussis vaccine (“DTaP”) on June 14, 2010, and thereafter suffered an allergic autoimmune reaction which manifested in the form of persistent muscular and joint pain and disability which was caused in fact by the vaccination. See Petition at 1. On April 4, 2014, the parties filed a stipulation, stating that a decision should be entered 1 Because this decision contains a reasoned explanation for the undersigned’s action in this case, the undersigned intends to post this ruling on the website of the United States Court of Federal Claims, in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-347, § 205, 116 Stat. 2899, 2913 (codified as amended at 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2006)). 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 Case 1:13-vv-00432-UNJ Document 27 Filed 04/28/14 Page 2 of 7 awarding compensation. Respondent denies that the DTaP vaccine caused petitioner’s alleged muscle and joint pain, any other injury, or his current disabilities. 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 stipulated that petitioner shall receive the following compensation: A lump sum of $130,000.00, in the form of a check payable to petitioner. This amount represents compensation for all damages that would be available under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). Stipulation ¶ 8. The undersigned approves the requested amount 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/ Nora Beth Dorsey Nora Beth Dorsey 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 Case 1:13-vv-00432-UNJ Document 27 Filed 04/28/14 Page 3 of 7 Case 1:13-vv-00432-UNJ Document 27 Filed 04/28/14 Page 4 of 7 Case 1:13-vv-00432-UNJ Document 27 Filed 04/28/14 Page 5 of 7 Case 1:13-vv-00432-UNJ Document 27 Filed 04/28/14 Page 6 of 7 Case 1:13-vv-00432-UNJ Document 27 Filed 04/28/14 Page 7 of 7