VICP Registry Case Source Bundle Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_16-vv-00737 Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_16-vv-00737 Petitioner: Anthony Sclafani Filed: 2017-09-27 Decided: 2017-11-14 Vaccine: influenza Vaccination date: 2014-12-10 Condition: Guillain Barré Syndrome Outcome: compensated Award amount USD: 320000 AI-assisted case summary: Anthony Sclafani filed a petition on September 27, 2017, seeking compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. He alleged that he suffered from Guillain Barré Syndrome (GBS) as a result of an influenza vaccine he received on December 10, 2014, and that he experienced residual effects from the condition for more than six months. The Secretary of Health and Human Services, the respondent, denied that the flu vaccine caused Mr. Sclafani's GBS or any other injury. Despite maintaining their respective positions, both parties agreed to settle the case through a stipulation filed on September 22, 2017. Special Master Brian H. Corcoran reviewed the stipulation and found it to be reasonable, adopting it as the decision of the court. The stipulation awarded Mr. Sclafani a lump sum of $320,000.00, payable by check to the Petitioner, as compensation for all damages. The public decision does not describe the onset of symptoms, specific clinical details, diagnostic tests, treatments, or expert witnesses. Elaine Whitfield Sharp represented the Petitioner, and Douglas Ross represented the Respondent. Theory of causation field: Petitioner Anthony Sclafani alleged that his December 10, 2014, influenza vaccine caused Guillain Barré Syndrome (GBS) and residual effects lasting more than six months. Respondent denied causation. The parties reached a settlement via stipulation, filed September 22, 2017, agreeing to an award of $320,000.00. Special Master Brian H. Corcoran adopted the stipulation as the decision, awarding the lump sum for all damages. The public text does not specify the medical mechanism, expert testimony, or the specific theory of causation relied upon for the award, other than the general allegation of GBS following vaccination. Public staged source text: ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_16-vv-00737-0 Date issued/filed: 2017-11-14 Pages: 7 Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 9/27/2017) Regarding 30 DECISION Stipulation (Signed by Special Master Brian H. Corcoran). (cr) Copy to parties. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:16-vv-00737-UNJ Document 38 Filed 11/14/17 Page 1 of 7 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 16-737V (not to be published) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ANTHONY SCLAFANI, * * Special Master Corcoran * Petitioner, * Filed: September 27, 2017 * v. * * Decision by Stipulation; Damages; SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Influenza (“Flu”) Vaccine; Guillain AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Barre Syndrome (“GBS”). * Respondent. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Elaine Whitfield Sharp, Whitfield, Sharp, & Sharp, Marblehead, MA, for Petitioner. Douglas Ross, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1 On June 22, 2016, Anthony Sclafani filed a petition seeking compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (“Vaccine Program”).2 Petitioner alleges that he suffered from Guillain Barré Syndrome (“GBS”) as a result of his December 10, 2014, influenza (“flu”) vaccine. Petitioner further alleges that he has experienced the residual effects of this condition for more than six months. 1 Although this Decision has been formally designated “not to be published,” it will nevertheless be posted on the Court of Federal Claims’s website in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002, 44 U.S.C. § 3501 (2012). This means the ruling will be available to anyone with access to the internet. As provided by 42 U.S.C. § 300aa- 12(d)(4)(B), however, the parties may object to the decision’s inclusion of certain kinds of confidential information. Specifically, under Vaccine Rule 18(b), each party has fourteen days within which to request redaction “of any information furnished by that party: (1) that is a trade secret or commercial or financial in substance and is privileged or confidential; or (2) that includes medical files or similar files, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy.” Vaccine Rule 18(b). Otherwise, the whole decision in its present form will be available. Id. 2 The Vaccine Program comprises Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3758, codified as amended at 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-10 through 34 (2012) (“Vaccine Act” or “the Act”). Case 1:16-vv-00737-UNJ Document 38 Filed 11/14/17 Page 2 of 7 Respondent denies that the flu vaccine caused Petitioner’s GBS, or any other injury. Nonetheless both parties, while maintaining their above-stated positions, agreed in a stipulation (filed on September 22, 2017) that the issues before them could be settled, and that a decision should be entered awarding Petitioner compensation. I have reviewed the file, and based upon that review, I conclude that the parties’ stipulation (as attached hereto) is reasonable. I therefore adopt it as my decision in awarding damages on the terms set forth therein. The stipulation awards:  A lump sum of $320,000.00 in the form of a check payable to Petitioner. Stipulation ¶ 8. This amount represents compensation for all damages that would be available under Section 15(a) of the Act. I approve a Vaccine Program award in the requested amount set forth above to be made to Petitioner. In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment herewith.3 IT IS SO ORDERED. /s/ Brian H. Corcoran Brian H. Corcoran Special Master 3 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties may expedite entry of judgment by each filing (either jointly or separately) a notice renouncing their right to seek review. 2 Case 1:16-vv-00737-UNJ Document 38 Filed 11/14/17 Page 3 of 7 Case 1:16-vv-00737-UNJ Document 38 Filed 11/14/17 Page 4 of 7 Case 1:16-vv-00737-UNJ Document 38 Filed 11/14/17 Page 5 of 7 Case 1:16-vv-00737-UNJ Document 38 Filed 11/14/17 Page 6 of 7 Case 1:16-vv-00737-UNJ Document 38 Filed 11/14/17 Page 7 of 7