VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_14-vv-00635
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_14-vv-00635
Petitioner: Linda Haft
Filed: 2014-10-16
Decided: 2015-01-22
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 2013-10-17
Condition: shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA)
Outcome: compensated
Award amount USD: 123016

AI-assisted case summary:
Linda Haft filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, alleging that she suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) caused by the influenza vaccine she received on October 17, 2013. The respondent conceded that her injury was consistent with SIRVA and was caused in fact by the flu vaccine. The respondent also agreed that the injury lasted for more than six months and that no other causes could be identified. Based on the respondent's concession and the evidence, the court issued a ruling on entitlement, finding Ms. Haft entitled to compensation. Subsequently, the parties filed a proffer on the award of compensation, with the respondent proposing an award of $106,160.00 to cover all elements of compensation. Ms. Haft agreed to this proposed award. The court issued a decision awarding this lump sum payment. Later, the parties filed a stipulation for attorneys' fees and costs, agreeing to an award of $16,224.00 in fees and $632.88 in costs, for a total of $16,856.88. This amount was awarded as a lump sum jointly payable to Ms. Haft and her counsel. The total compensation awarded to Ms. Haft was $106,160.00 for her injury, plus $16,856.88 for attorneys' fees and costs.

Theory of causation field:
Off-Table

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_14-vv-00635-0
Date issued/filed: 2014-11-21
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 10/16/2014) regarding 14 Ruling on Entitlement Signed by Chief Special Master Denise Kathryn Vowell. (dlb) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:14-vv-00635-UNJ Document 18 Filed 11/21/14 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 14-635V
Filed: October 16, 2014
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
LINDA HAFT, *
*
Petitioner, * Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;
* Influenza Vaccine or Flu Vaccine;
* Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine
SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Administration; SIRVA
AND HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
Respondent. *
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1
Vowell, Chief Special Master:
On July 21, 2014, Linda Haft 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 alleged that she suffered a shoulder injury which was
caused in fact by the influenza vaccine she received on October 17, 2013. Petition at 1.
The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.
On October 16, 2014, respondent filed her Rule 4(c) report [“Res. Report”] in
which she concedes that petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Res. Report
at 1. Specifically, respondent indicates “that petitioner’s alleged injury is consistent with
a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) and that it was caused in
fact by the flu vaccine she received on October 17, 2013.” Id. at 4. Respondent agrees
that petitioner’s injury lasted for more than six months and that no other causes for
petitioner’s injury can be identified. Id.
1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I intend to
post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, 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)). 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, I agree that the identified material fits within this definition, I will redact such
material from public access.
2 National 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 (2006).

Case 1:14-vv-00635-UNJ Document 18 Filed 11/21/14 Page 2 of 2
In view of respondent’s concession and the evidence before me, I find that
petitioner is entitled to compensation.
s/Denise K. Vowell
Denise K. Vowell
Chief Special Master
2

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 2: USCOURTS-cofc-1_14-vv-00635-1
Date issued/filed: 2014-12-30
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 12/09/2014) regarding 21 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer Signed by Chief Special Master Denise Kathryn Vowell. (dlb) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:14-vv-00635-UNJ Document 28 Filed 12/30/14 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 14-635V
Filed: December 9, 2014
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
LINDA HAFT, *
*
Petitioner, * Damages Decision Based on Proffer;
* Influenza Vaccine or Flu Vaccine;
* Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine
SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Administration; SIRVA
AND HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
Respondent. *
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Maximillian Muller, Muller Brazil, LLP, Philadelphia, PA, for petitioner.
Gordon Shemin, US Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1
Vowell, Chief Special Master:
On July 21, 2014, Linda Haft 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 alleged that she suffered a shoulder injury which was
caused in fact by the influenza vaccine she received on October 17, 2013. Petition at 1.
The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.
On October 16, 2014, I issued a ruling on entitlement, finding petitioner entitled to
compensation. On December 9, 2014, respondent filed a proffer on award of
compensation [“Proffer”] indicating petitioner should be awarded $106,160.00, an
amount representing “all elements of compensation to which petitioner would be entitled
under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a) for her vaccine-related injury.” Proffer at 1. According
to respondent’s Proffer, petitioner agrees to the proposed award of compensation. Id.
1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I intend
to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, 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)). 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, I agree that the identified material fits within this definition, I will redact such
material from public access.
2 National 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 (2006).

Case 1:14-vv-00635-UNJ Document 28 Filed 12/30/14 Page 2 of 2
Respondent indicates petitioner is a competent adult and guardianship is not required in
this case. Id. at 2.
Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Proffer, I award petitioner a lump
sum payment of $106,160.00 in the form of a check payable to petitioner, Linda
Haft. 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
s/Denise K. Vowell
Denise K. Vowell
Chief Special Master
3 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment can be expedited by each party filing a notice
renouncing the right to seek review.
2

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 3: USCOURTS-cofc-1_14-vv-00635-2
Date issued/filed: 2015-01-22
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 12/23/14) regarding 26 DECISION Fees Stipulation/Proffer (Signed by Chief Special Master Denise Kathryn Vowell.)(mpj) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:14-vv-00635-UNJ Document 30 Filed 01/22/15 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 14-635V
Filed: December 23, 2014
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
LINDA HAFT, *
*
Petitioner, *
v. *
* Attorney Fees and Costs; Stipulation
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND *
HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
Respondent. *
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Maximillian J. Muller, Esq., Muller Brazil, LLP, Philadelphia, PA, for petitioner.
Gordon Shemin, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
DECISION ON ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS1
Vowell, Chief Special Master:
On July 21, 2014, Linda Haft 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 alleged that she suffered a shoulder injury which was
caused in fact by the influenza vaccine she received on October 17, 2013. On
December 9, 2014, I issued a decision awarding compensation to petitioner based on
the parties’ stipulation.
On December 22, 2014, the parties filed a Stipulation of Fact Concerning
Attorneys’ Fees and Costs. According to the stipulation, the parties agree upon an
award of $16, 224.00 in attorneys’ fees and $632.88 in costs for a total award to
1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I intend
to post this decision on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, 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)). In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), petitioners have 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, I agree that the identified material fits within this definition, I will
redact such material from public access.
2 National 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 (2006).

Case 1:14-vv-00635-UNJ Document 30 Filed 01/22/15 Page 2 of 2
petitioner in the amount of $16,856.88. In accordance with General Order #9,
petitioner’s counsel represents that petitioner incurred no out-of-pocket expenses.
The Vaccine Act permits an award of reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs. 42
U.S.C. § 300 aa-15(e). I find the proposed amount to be reasonable.
Accordingly, I award the total $16,856.883 as a lump sum in the form of a
check jointly payable to petitioner and petitioner’s counsel Maximillian J. Muller.
The clerk of the court shall enter judgment in accordance herewith.4
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Denise K. Vowell
Denise K. Vowell
Chief Special Master
3 This amount is intended to cover all legal expenses incurred in this matter. This award encompasses all
charges by the attorney against a client, “advanced costs” as well as fees for legal services rendered.
Furthermore, 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(e)(3) prevents an attorney from charging or collecting fees (including
costs) that would be in addition to the amount awarded herein. See generally Beck v. Sec’y, HHS, 924
F.2d 1029 (Fed. Cir.1991).
4 Entry of judgment can be expedited by each party’s filing of a notice renouncing the right to seek review.
See Vaccine Rule 11(a).
2