VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-00813
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-00813
Petitioner: Jean Mann
Filed: 2015-07-31
Decided: 2017-04-25
Vaccine: Tdap
Vaccination date: 2012-08-15
Condition: brachial neuritis of her left shoulder
Outcome: compensated
Award amount USD: 179100

AI-assisted case summary:
Jean Mann filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, alleging that she suffered brachial neuritis of her left shoulder as a result of receiving a tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccine on August 15, 2012. The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, conceded that Ms. Mann is entitled to compensation. The respondent concluded that Ms. Mann suffered a Table brachial neuritis and that the evidence did not show the condition was due to factors unrelated to the vaccination. A ruling on entitlement was issued on April 11, 2016, finding Ms. Mann entitled to compensation. Subsequently, on December 20, 2016, the parties filed a joint stipulation. Based on this stipulation, the Chief Special Master awarded Ms. Mann a lump sum payment of $179,100.00. This award represents compensation for all damages available under the Act.

Theory of causation field:
Table

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-00813-0
Date issued/filed: 2016-05-19
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC ORDER/RULING (Originally filed: 04/11/2016) regarding 43 Ruling on Entitlement ( Signed by Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey.)(mpj) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:15-vv-00813-UNJ Document 49 Filed 05/19/16 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 15-0813V
Filed: April 11, 2016
UNPUBLISHED
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
JEAN MANN, *
*
Petitioner, * Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;
* Tetanus-Diphtheria-Acellular Pertussis
v.
* (“Tdap”) Vaccine; Brachial Neuritis;
SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Special Processing Unit (“SPU”)
AND HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
Respondent. *
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Robert J. Krakow, Law Offices of Robert J. Krakow, P.C., New York, NY, for petitioner.
Claudia B. Gangi, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1
Dorsey, Chief Special Master:
On July 31, 2015, Jean Mann (“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 alleges that she suffered brachial neuritis of her
left shoulder as a result of receiving a tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis (“Tdap”)
vaccine on August 15, 2012. Petition at 4. The case was assigned to the Special
Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.
On April 11, 2016, respondent filed her Rule 4(c) report in which she concedes
that petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report
at 1. Specifically, respondent concludes that petitioner suffered a Table brachial neuritis
and that there is not a preponderance of the evidence that the brachial neuritis was due
to factors unrelated to the Tdap vaccination. Id. at 4. Respondent further agrees that
compensation is appropriate under the Act. Id.
1 Because this unpublished ruling 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.
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-00813-UNJ Document 49 Filed 05/19/16 Page 2 of 2
In view of respondent’s concession and the evidence before me, the
undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to compensation.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Nora Beth Dorsey
Nora Beth Dorsey
Chief Special Master
2

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 2: USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-00813-1
Date issued/filed: 2017-04-25
Pages: 7
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 12/20/2016) regarding 59 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer ( Signed by Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey.)(mpj) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:15-vv-00813-UNJ Document 69 Filed 04/25/17 Page 1 of 7
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 15-0813V
Filed: December 20, 2016
UNPUBLISHED
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
JEAN MANN, *
*
Petitioner, * Damages Decision Based on Stipulation
v. * Tetanus-Diphtheria-Acellular Pertussis
* (“Tdap”) Vaccine; Brachial Neuritis;
SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Special Processing Unit (“SPU”)
AND HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
Respondent. *
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Robert Joel Krakow, Law Offices, New York, NY, for petitioner.
Claudia Gangi Barnes, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1
Dorsey, Chief Special Master:
On July 31, 2015, Jean Mann (“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 alleges that she suffered brachial neuritis of her
left shoulder as a result of receiving a tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis (“Tdap”)
vaccine on August 15, 2012. Petition at 4; Stipulation, filed December 20, 2016, at ¶ 2,
4. Petitioner further alleges that she experienced the residual effects of her injury for
more than six months. Petition at 4; Stipulation at ¶ 5. The case was assigned to the
Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.
On April 11, 2016, a ruling on entitlement was issued, finding petitioner entitled to
compensation for brachial neuritis. On December 20, 2016, respondent filed a joint
stipulation, stating that petitioner should be awarded $179,100.00. Stipulation at ¶9.
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.
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-00813-UNJ Document 69 Filed 04/25/17 Page 2 of 7
Based on the record as a whole, the undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to an
award as stated in the stipulation.
Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached stipulation, the undersigned
awards petitioner a lump sum payment of $179,100.00, in the form of a
check payable to petitioner. Stipulation at ¶ 9. This amount represents
compensation for all 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

Case 1:15-vv-00813-UNJ Document 69 Filed 04/25/17 Page 3 of 7

Case 1:15-vv-00813-UNJ Document 69 Filed 04/25/17 Page 4 of 7

Case 1:15-vv-00813-UNJ Document 69 Filed 04/25/17 Page 5 of 7

Case 1:15-vv-00813-UNJ Document 69 Filed 04/25/17 Page 6 of 7

Case 1:15-vv-00813-UNJ Document 69 Filed 04/25/17 Page 7 of 7