VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-00991
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-00991
Petitioner: Susan Bachant
Filed: 2015-12-07
Decided: 2016-04-27
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 2014-10-24
Condition: shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA)
Outcome: compensated
Award amount USD: 75000

AI-assisted case summary:
Susan Bachant filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, alleging that an influenza vaccination she received on October 24, 2014, caused her to suffer a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA). The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, conceded that petitioner was entitled to compensation. The respondent concluded that Ms. Bachant's injury was consistent with SIRVA and was caused by the flu vaccine. Based on this concession and the evidence, the court found Ms. Bachant entitled to compensation. The decision awarded her a lump sum payment of $75,000.00 for all damages. Subsequently, the parties filed a stipulation for attorneys' fees and costs, agreeing to an award of $8,206.24, payable jointly to Ms. Bachant and her counsel. The court granted this request, awarding the total amount for legal expenses.

Theory of causation field:
Off-Table

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-00991-0
Date issued/filed: 2016-04-27
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC ORDER/RULING (Originally filed: 12/07/2015) regarding 16 Ruling on Entitlement, DECISION Stipulation/Proffer ( Signed by Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey.)(mpj) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:15-vv-00991-UNJ Document 24 Filed 04/27/16 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 15-991V
Filed: December 7, 2015
Unpublished
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
SUSAN BACHANT, *
*
Petitioner, * Ruling on Entitlement; Damages
* Decision Based on Proffer;
* Concession; Influenza (“Flu”)
SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Vaccination; Shoulder Injury Related
AND HUMAN SERVICES, * to Vaccine Administration (“SIRVA”);
* Special Processing Unit (“SPU”)
Respondent. *
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Andrew Donald Downing, Van Cott & Talamante, PLLC, for petitioner.
Althea Walker Davis, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
RULING ON ENTITLEMENT AND DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES 1
Dorsey, Chief Special Master:
On September 9, 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 alleges that the influenza [“flu”] vaccination that
she received on October 24, 2014 caused her to suffer a shoulder injury. Petition at 1.
The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.
On December 4, 2015, respondent filed a Rule 4(c) Report and Proffer on
Damages in which she concedes that petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case.
Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report and Proffer on Damages at 1 (ECF No. 15).
Specifically, respondent “has concluded that petitioner’s alleged injury is consistent with
shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA), and that it was caused-in-fact
by the flu vaccine she received on October 24, 2014.” Id. at 4. Respondent further
indicates that “petitioner has met the statutory requirements for entitlement to
1 Because this unpublished ruling and 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-00991-UNJ Document 24 Filed 04/27/16 Page 2 of 2
compensation” and that “petitioner has satisfied all legal prerequisites for compensation
under the Act”. Id. (Citations omitted).
Additionally, “[b]ased upon the evidence of record, respondent proffers that
petitioner should be awarded $75,000.00” in compensation. Respondent’s Rule 4(c)
Report and Proffer on Damages at 4. Respondent represents that petitioner agrees
with the proffered award. Id.
In view of respondent’s concession and the evidence before me, the
undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to compensation. Further, based on
the record as a whole, the undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to an award
as stated in Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report and Proffer on Damages.
Pursuant to the terms stated in Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report and Proffer on
Damages at 4, the undersigned awards petitioner a lump sum payment of
$75,000.00 in the form of a check payable to petitioner, Susan Bachant.3 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.4
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Nora Beth Dorsey
Nora Beth Dorsey
Chief Special Master
3 “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
pain and suffering, and future lost wages.” Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report and Proffer on Damages at 4.
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.
2

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 2: USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-00991-1
Date issued/filed: 2016-05-02
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 12/22/2015) regarding 21 DECISION Fees Stipulation/Proffer. Signed by Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey. (tpj) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:15-vv-00991-UNJ Document 25 Filed 05/02/16 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 15-991V
Filed: December 22, 2015
UNPUBLISHED
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
SUSAN BACHANT, *
*
Petitioner, *
v. *
* Attorneys’ Fees and Costs; Stipulation
SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Special Processing Unit (“SPU”)
AND HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
Respondent. *
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Andrew Downing, Van Cott & Talamante, PLLC, Phoenix, AZ, for petitioner.
Althea Walker Davis, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
DECISION ON ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS1
Dorsey, Chief Special Master:
On September 9, 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”]. Petitioner alleged that she suffered a shoulder injury following receipt of
her October 24, 2014 influenza vaccination. On December 7, 2015, the undersigned
issued a decision awarding compensation to petitioner based on respondent’s proffer.
On December 22, 2015, the parties filed a Stipulation of Fact Concerning
Attorneys’ Fees and Costs. According to the stipulation, the parties stipulate to an
award of $8,206.24. In accordance with General Order #9, petitioner’s counsel
represents that petitioner incurred no out-of-pocket expenses.
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-00991-UNJ Document 25 Filed 05/02/16 Page 2 of 2
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.
Accordingly, the undersigned awards the total of $8,206.243 as a lump sum
in the form of a check jointly payable to petitioner and petitioner’s counsel
Andrew D. Downing.
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.