VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_16-vv-00267
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_16-vv-00267
Petitioner: Laurel Cutter
Filed: 2017-01-17
Decided: 2017-06-15
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 2014-09-30
Condition: Guillain-Barre Syndrome (“GBS”)
Outcome: compensated
Award amount USD: 150000

AI-assisted case summary:
Laurel Cutter, an adult, filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program on February 25, 2016. She alleged that she suffered Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS) caused by her September 30, 2014 influenza vaccination. Ms. Cutter further alleged that she experienced residual effects of her injury for more than six months and that there had been no prior award or settlement of a civil action for damages on her behalf. The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, denied that the flu vaccine caused petitioner to suffer GBS or any other injury. Nevertheless, on January 17, 2017, the parties filed a joint stipulation agreeing that a decision should be entered awarding compensation. Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey found the stipulation reasonable and adopted it as the decision of the Court. Laurel Cutter was awarded a lump sum of $150,000.00, payable to petitioner, representing compensation for all items of damages available under the Vaccine Act. The public decision does not describe the onset of symptoms, specific clinical details, diagnostic tests, treatments, or expert witnesses. Petitioner was represented by Jeffrey S. Pop of Jeffrey S. Pop & Associates, and respondent was represented by Douglas Ross of the U.S. Department of Justice.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioner Laurel Cutter alleged that her September 30, 2014 influenza vaccination caused Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS). The respondent denied this allegation. The parties filed a joint stipulation on January 17, 2017, agreeing to an award of compensation. Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey adopted the stipulation, awarding petitioner a lump sum of $150,000.00 for all damages. The public decision does not specify the theory of causation, medical experts, or the mechanism of injury. The case was settled via stipulation.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_16-vv-00267-0
Date issued/filed: 2017-06-15
Pages: 7
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 01/17/2017) regarding 27 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer ( Signed by Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey.)(mpj) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:16-vv-00267-UNJ Document 36 Filed 06/15/17 Page 1 of 7
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 16-267V
Filed: January 17, 2017
UNPUBLISHED
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
LAUREL CUTTER, *
*
Petitioner, * Joint Stipulation on Damages;
v. * Influenza;
* Guillain-Barre Syndrome (“GBS”);
SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Special Processing Unit (“SPU”)
AND HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
Respondent. *
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Jeffrey S. Pop, Jeffrey S. Pop & Associates, Beverly Hills, CA, for petitioner.
Douglas Ross, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1
Dorsey, Chief Special Master:
On February 25, 2016, 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 Guillain-Barre Syndrome (“GBS”)
caused by her September 30, 2014 influenza vaccination. Petition at 1; Stipulation, filed
January 17, 2017, at ¶ 4. Petitioner further alleges that she experienced residual
effects of her injury for more than six months and that there has been no prior award or
settlement of a civil action for damages on her behalf as a result of her condition.
Petition at 7; Stipulation at ¶¶ 4-5. “Respondent denies that the flu vaccine caused
petitioner to suffer GBS, or any other injury. ” Stipulation at ¶ 6.
Nevertheless, on January 17, 2017, the parties filed the attached joint stipulation,
stating that a decision should be entered awarding compensation. The undersigned
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 1:16-vv-00267-UNJ Document 36 Filed 06/15/17 Page 2 of 7
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 $150,000.00 in the form of a check payable to petitioner.
Stipulation at ¶ 8. This amount represents compensation for all items of
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 1:16-vv-00267-UNJ Document 36 Filed 06/15/17 Page 3 of 7

Case 1:16-vv-00267-UNJ Document 36 Filed 06/15/17 Page 4 of 7

Case 1:16-vv-00267-UNJ Document 36 Filed 06/15/17 Page 5 of 7

Case 1:16-vv-00267-UNJ Document 36 Filed 06/15/17 Page 6 of 7

Case 1:16-vv-00267-UNJ Document 36 Filed 06/15/17 Page 7 of 7