VICP Registry Case Source Bundle Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_13-vv-00767 Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_13-vv-00767 Petitioner: Reshama Shaikh Filed: 2013-10-03 Decided: 2016-09-15 Vaccine: Tdap Vaccination date: 2010-10-15 Condition: Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy Outcome: compensated Award amount USD: 500000 AI-assisted case summary: Reshama Shaikh filed a petition on October 3, 2013, alleging that a Tetanus Diptheria acellular-Pertussis (Tdap) vaccination received on October 15, 2010 caused her to develop Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy (CIDP) with residual effects lasting more than six months. The respondent denied that the Tdap vaccination caused or significantly aggravated petitioner's alleged CIDP or any other injury, and further denied that petitioner's current disabilities were the result of a vaccine-related injury. Despite these denials, both parties agreed to a joint stipulation filed on August 8, 2016, to settle the case. Special Master Thomas L. Gowen reviewed the stipulation, found it reasonable, and adopted it as the decision of the Court. Petitioner was awarded a lump sum of $500,000.00, representing compensation for all damages available under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). The public decision does not describe the specific onset of symptoms, medical tests performed, treatments received, or the names of any medical experts consulted by either party. Petitioner was represented by Lawrence R. Cohan of Anapol Weiss, and respondent was represented by Darryl R. Wishard of the United States Department of Justice. Theory of causation field: Petitioner Reshama Shaikh alleged that a Tdap vaccination on October 15, 2010, caused her to develop Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy (CIDP) with residual effects lasting more than six months. Respondent denied causation. The parties reached a joint stipulation on August 8, 2016, which was adopted by Special Master Thomas L. Gowen. Petitioner received a lump sum award of $500,000.00. The public decision does not detail the specific medical mechanism, expert testimony, or evidence presented regarding causation, relying instead on the parties' stipulation. Petitioner's counsel was Lawrence R. Cohan of Anapol Weiss; respondent's counsel was Darryl R. Wishard. Public staged source text: ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_13-vv-00767-0 Date issued/filed: 2016-08-29 Pages: 7 Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 08/08/2016) regarding 93 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer ( Signed by Special Master Thomas L. Gowen.)(mpj) Copy to parties. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:13-vv-00767-UNJ Document 105 Filed 08/29/16 Page 1 of 7 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 13-767V Filed: August 8, 2016 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * UNPUBLISHED RESHAMA SHAIKH, * * Special Master Gowen Petitioner, * * Tetanus Diptheria acellular- v. * Pertussis Vaccine; Chronic * Inflammatory Demyelinating SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Polyneuropathy. AND HUMAN SERVICES, * * Respondent. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Lawrence R. Cohan, Anapol Weiss, Philadelphia, PA, for petitioner. Darryl R. Wishard, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent. DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1 On October 3, 2013, Reshama Shaikh (“petitioner”) filed a petition 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 receiving a Tetanus Diptheria acellular-Pertussis (“Tdap”) vaccination on October 15, 2010, she suffered Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy (“CIDP”). Stipulation ¶ 2, 4, filed Aug. 8, 2016. Further, petitioner alleged that she experienced 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 ruling on the website of the United States Court of Federal Claims, in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002, 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of Electronic Government Services). 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 (2012) (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-00767-UNJ Document 105 Filed 08/29/16 Page 2 of 7 On August 8, 2016, the parties filed a stipulation in which they state that a decision should be entered awarding compensation. Respondent denies that the Tdap vaccination caused or significantly aggravated petitioner’s alleged CIDP, or any other injury. Id. at ¶ 6. Respondent further denies that petitioner’s current disabilities are the result of a vaccine-related injiury. Id. 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: A lump sum of $500,000.00, in the form of a check payable to petitioner, Reshama Shaikh. This amount 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 amount for petitioner’s compensation. Accordingly, an award should be made consistent with the stipulation. The clerk of the court SHALL ENTER JUDGMENT in accordance with the terms of the parties’ stipulation.3 IT IS SO ORDERED. s/ Thomas L. Gowen Thomas L. Gowen 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-00767-UNJ Document 105 Filed 08/29/16 Page 3 of 7 Case 1:13-vv-00767-UNJ Document 105 Filed 08/29/16 Page 4 of 7 Case 1:13-vv-00767-UNJ Document 105 Filed 08/29/16 Page 5 of 7 Case 1:13-vv-00767-UNJ Document 105 Filed 08/29/16 Page 6 of 7 Case 1:13-vv-00767-UNJ Document 105 Filed 08/29/16 Page 7 of 7