VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-00386
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-00386
Petitioner: Katya Sido
Filed: 2015-04-16
Decided: 2015-10-20
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 2013-11-01
Condition: shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA)
Outcome: compensated
Award amount USD: 122390

AI-assisted case summary:
Katya Sido filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program on April 16, 2015, alleging that she suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) as a result of an influenza vaccination on November 1, 2013. The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, filed a Rule 4(c) Report on June 29, 2015, conceding that petitioner's injury was consistent with SIRVA and was not due to factors unrelated to the vaccination. The respondent further stated that the injury was compensable as a "caused-in-fact" injury under the Vaccine Act. Based on the respondent's concession and the evidence, Chief Special Master Denise Kathryn Vowell issued a ruling on entitlement on June 30, 2015, finding petitioner entitled to compensation. Subsequently, on September 14, 2015, the respondent filed a proffer on the award of compensation, which petitioner agreed to. Special Master Vowell issued a decision on October 20, 2015, awarding Katya Sido a lump sum payment of $122,390.25 for all elements of compensation. Later, on November 9, 2015, the parties filed a stipulation for attorneys' fees and costs. Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey issued a decision on January 13, 2016, awarding $10,987.66 in attorneys' fees and costs, jointly payable to petitioner and her counsel, Amber D. Wilson of Maglio Christopher and Toale, PA. Petitioner was represented by Amber D. Wilson, and respondent was represented by Justine E. Walter of the U.S. Department of Justice.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioner Katya Sido alleged a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) following an influenza vaccination on November 1, 2013. The respondent conceded that the injury was consistent with SIRVA and was "caused-in-fact" under the Vaccine Act. The public decision does not describe the specific medical mechanism or expert testimony. The case resulted in a compensated outcome. Special Master Denise Kathryn Vowell issued a ruling on entitlement on June 30, 2015, based on the respondent's concession. A subsequent decision on damages by Special Master Vowell on October 20, 2015, awarded a lump sum of $122,390.25. Attorneys' fees and costs of $10,987.66 were awarded jointly to petitioner and her counsel, Amber D. Wilson, by Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey on January 13, 2016. Petitioner was represented by Amber D. Wilson (Maglio Christopher and Toale, PA) and respondent by Justine E. Walter (U.S. Department of Justice).

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-00386-0
Date issued/filed: 2015-07-27
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC ORDER/RULING (Originally filed: 06/30/2015) regarding 13 Ruling on Entitlement ( Signed by Chief Special Master Denise Kathryn Vowell.)(mpj) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:15-vv-00386-UNJ Document 15 Filed 07/27/15 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 15-0386V
Filed: June 30, 2015
Unpublished
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
KATYA SIDO, *
*
Petitioner, * Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;
* Influenza (“flu”) vaccine; Shoulder Injury
v. * Related to Vaccine Administration
* (“SIRVA”); Special Processing Unit
* (“SPU”)
SECRETARY OF HEALTH *
AND HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
Respondent. *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Amber D. Wilson, Maglio Christopher and Toale, PA, Washington, DC, for petitioner.
Justine E. Walter, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
1
RULING ON ENTITLEMENT
Vowell, Chief Special Master:
On April 16, 2015, Katya Sido 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”]. The petition alleges that as a result of an influenza (“flu”)
vaccination on November 1, 2013, petitioner suffered a shoulder injury related to
vaccine administration (“SIRVA”). Petition at ¶¶2, 14-15. The case was assigned to the
Special Processing Unit (“SPU”) of the Office of Special Masters.
On June 29, 2015, respondent filed her Rule 4(c) Report [“Res. Report”], in which
she concedes that petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Resp. Report at 4.
Specifically, respondent has “concluded that a preponderance of the evidence
1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, it will be
posted 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 1:15-vv-00386-UNJ Document 15 Filed 07/27/15 Page 2 of 2
establishes that petitioner’s injury is consistent with a [SIRVA], and that [the] injury is not
due to factors unrelated to her November 1, 2013, flu vaccination. Id. Respondent
stated that “”in light of the information contained in petitioner’s medical records,
respondent has concluded that petitioner’s right shoulder injury is compensable as a
‘caused-in-fact’ injury under the Vaccine Act.” Id.
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_15-vv-00386-1
Date issued/filed: 2015-10-20
Pages: 4
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 09/14/2015) regarding 19 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer (Signed by Special Master Denise Kathryn Vowell.)(mpj) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:15-vv-00386-UNJ Document 25 Filed 10/20/15 Page 1 of 4
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 15-0386V
Filed: September 14, 2015
Unpublished
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
KATYA SIDO, *
*
*
Petitioner, * Damages Decision Based on Proffer;
* Influenza (“flu”) vaccine; Shoulder Injury
v. * Related to Vaccine Administration
* (“SIRVA”); Special Processing Unit
* (“SPU”)
SECRETARY OF HEALTH *
AND HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
Respondent. *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Amber D. Wilson, Maglio Christopher and Toale, PA, Washington, DC, for petitioner.
Justine E. Walter, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES
1
Vowell, Special Master:
On April 16, 2015, Katya Sido 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”]. The petition alleged that as a result of an influenza (“flu”)
vaccination on November 1, 2013, petitioner suffered a shoulder injury related to
vaccine administration (“SIRVA”). Petition at ¶¶2, 14-15. The case was assigned to the
Special Processing Unit (“SPU”) of the Office of Special Masters.
On June 30, 2015, I issued a ruling on entitlement, finding petitioner entitled to
compensation. On September 14, 2015, respondent filed a proffer on award of
compensation (“Proffer”) detailing compensation for all elements of compensation 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, 116 Stat. 2899, 2913 (Dec. 17, 2002). In accordance with
Vaccine Rule 18(b), petitioners have 14 days to identify and move to delete 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 delete 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 (2012).

Case 1:15-vv-00386-UNJ Document 25 Filed 10/20/15 Page 2 of 4
which petitioner would be entitled under §15(a). According to respondent’s Proffer,
petitioner agrees to the proposed award of compensation.
Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Proffer, I award petitioner a lump
sum payment of $122,390.25 in the form of a check payable to petitioner.
This amount represents compensation for all damages that would be available
under §15(a).
The clerk of the court is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this
decision.3
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Denise K. Vowell
Denise K. Vowell
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

Case 1:15-vv-00386-UNJ Document 25 Filed 10/20/15 Page 3 of 4
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
)
KATYA SIDO, )
)
Petitioner, )
) No. 15-386V
v. ) Special Master Vowell
) ECF
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND ) SPU
HUMAN SERVICES, )
)
Respondent. )
)
RESPONDENT’S PROFFER ON AWARD OF COMPENSATION
On April 16, 2015, petitioner, Katya Sido, filed a petition for compensation under the
National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-10 to -34 (“Vaccine Act”), alleging
that she suffered from a right shoulder injury as a result of receiving an influenza vaccination in
her right arm on November 1, 2013. On June 29, 2015, respondent filed her Rule 4(c) Report
stating that petitioner’s right arm injury is consistent with a shoulder injury related to vaccine
administration (“SIRVA”). Respondent conceded that petitioner’s SIRVA is compensable under
the Vaccine Act. Accordingly, on June 30, 2015, Special Master Vowell issued a Ruling on
Entitlement finding that petitioner is entitled to compensation for SIRVA. For the purposes of
this proffer, the term “vaccine-related” is as described in Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report filed on
June 29, 2015.

Case 1:15-vv-00386-UNJ Document 25 Filed 10/20/15 Page 4 of 4
I. Items of Compensation
Based upon the evidence of record, respondent proffers that petitioner should be awarded
$122,390.25, which represents all elements of compensation to which petitioner is entitled under
42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a).1 Petitioner agrees.
II. Form of the Award
The parties recommend that the compensation provided to petitioner should be made
through a lump sum payment of $122,390.25 in the form of a check payable to petitioner.
Petitioner agrees.
Respectfully submitted,
BENJAMIN C. MIZER
Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General
RUPA BHATTACHARYYA
Director
Torts Branch, Civil Division
VINCENT J. MATANOSKI
Deputy Director
Torts Branch, Civil Division
GLENN A. MACLEOD
Senior Trial Counsel
Torts Branch, Civil Division
s/ Justine Walters
JUSTINE WALTERS
Trial Attorney
Torts Branch, Civil Division
U.S. Department of Justice
P.O. Box 146, Benjamin Franklin Station
Washington, D.C. 20044-0146
Tel.: (202) 307-6393
DATE: September 14, 2015
1 Should petitioner die prior to entry of judgment, the parties reserve the right to move the Court
for appropriate relief. In particular, respondent would oppose any award for future medical
expenses, future lost earnings, and future pain and suffering.
2

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 3: USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-00386-2
Date issued/filed: 2016-01-13
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 11/09/2015) regarding 28 DECISION Fees Stipulation/Proffer ( Signed by Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey.)(mpj) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:15-vv-00386-UNJ Document 31 Filed 01/13/16 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 15-0386V
Filed: November 9, 2015
UNPUBLISHED
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
KATYA SIDO, *
*
Petitioners, *
v. *
* Attorneys’ Fees and Costs; Stipulation;
SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Special Processing Unit (“SPU”)
AND HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
Respondent. *
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Amber D. Wilson, Maglio Christopher and Toale, PA, Washington, DC, for petitioner.
Justine E. Walters, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
1
DECISION ON ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS
Dorsey, Chief Special Master:
On April 16, 2015, 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” or “Program”). Petitioner alleged that as a result of an influenza vaccination on
November 1, 2013, she suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration
(“SIRVA”). On September 14, 2015, the undersigned issued a decision awarding
compensation to petitioner based on respondent’s proffer.
On November 9, 2015, the parties filed a Stipulation of Fact Concerning
Attorneys’ Fees and Costs. According to the stipulation, the parties stipulate to an
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, 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, the undersigned agrees that the identified material fits
within this definition, the undersigned 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 (2012).

Case 1:15-vv-00386-UNJ Document 31 Filed 01/13/16 Page 2 of 2
award of $10,987.66. In accordance with General Order #9, petitioner submitted an
affidavit stating that she 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). Based on the reasonableness of petitioner’s request and the
lack of any objection by respondent, the undersigned GRANTS the request for approval
and payment of attorneys’ fees and costs.
3
Accordingly, the undersigned awards the total of $10,987.66 as a lump
sum in the form of a check jointly payable to petitioner and petitioner’s counsel,
Amber D. Wilson.
The clerk of the court shall enter judgment in accordance herewith.4
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Nora Beth Dorsey
Nora Beth Dorsey
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 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.