VICP Registry Case Source Bundle Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_16-vv-00862 Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_16-vv-00862 Petitioner: Charles Davis Filed: 2017-08-03 Decided: 2018-05-10 Vaccine: Tdap Vaccination date: 2015-04-03 Condition: shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) Outcome: compensated Award amount USD: 115000 AI-assisted case summary: Charles Davis filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program on August 3, 2017, alleging a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) following a Tetanus Diphtheria acellular Pertussis (Tdap) vaccine administered on April 3, 2015. Mr. Davis stated the vaccine was administered in the United States, that he experienced residual effects of his right shoulder injuries for more than six months, and that he had no prior award or settlement for this condition. The Secretary of Health and Human Services, respondent, denied that the vaccine caused Mr. Davis's shoulder injuries. Despite this denial, the parties filed a joint stipulation on July 31, 2017, agreeing that compensation should be awarded. Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey found the stipulation reasonable and adopted it as the Court's decision. Mr. Davis was awarded a lump sum of $115,000.00, payable by check to the petitioner, representing compensation for all items of damages. The decision was issued on May 10, 2018. The public decision does not describe the specific onset of symptoms, medical examinations, diagnostic tests, treatments, or expert witnesses. Petitioner was represented by Maximillian J. Muller of Muller Brazil, LLP, and respondent was represented by Ann Donohue Martin of the U.S. Department of Justice. Theory of causation field: Petitioner Charles Davis alleged a Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA) following a Tetanus Diphtheria acellular Pertussis (Tdap) vaccine on April 3, 2015. The respondent denied causation. The parties filed a joint stipulation agreeing to compensation. The Special Master adopted the stipulation, awarding $115,000.00 as a lump sum for all damages. The theory of causation is based on the "Table" as indicated by the provided database fields, and the stipulation suggests an agreement on entitlement, though the specific medical mechanism, experts, or evidence supporting the SIRVA diagnosis and its link to the Tdap vaccine are not detailed in the public decision. Petitioner counsel was Maximillian J. Muller, and respondent counsel was Ann Donohue Martin. Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey issued the decision on May 10, 2018. Public staged source text: ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_16-vv-00862-1 Date issued/filed: 2018-05-10 Pages: 7 Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 08/03/2017) regarding 27 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer (Signed by Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey.)(mpj) Service on parties made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:16-vv-00862-UNJ Document 36 Filed 05/10/18 Page 1 of 7 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 16-862V Filed: August 3, 2017 UNPUBLISHED CHARLES DAVIS, Special Processing Unit (SPU); Joint Stipulation on Damages; Tetanus Petitioner, Diphtheria acellular Pertussis (Tdap) v. Vaccine; Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA) SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Maximillian J. Muller, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA, for petitioner. Ann Donohue Martin, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent. DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1 Dorsey, Chief Special Master: On July 21, 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 a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) following a Tetanus Diphtheria acellular Pertussis (“Tdap”) vaccine on April 3, 2015. Petition at 1; Stipulation, filed July 31, 2017, at ¶ 4. Petitioner further alleges that the Tdap vaccine was administered within the United States, that he experienced the residual effects of his right shoulder injuries for more than six months, and that there has been no prior award or settlement of a civil action for damages on his behalf as a result of his condition. Petition at 1-4; Stipulation at ¶¶ 3-5. “Respondent denies that the [] vaccine caused petitioner to suffer right shoulder injuries or any other injury.” Stipulation at ¶ 6. 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-00862-UNJ Document 36 Filed 05/10/18 Page 2 of 7 Nevertheless, on July 31, 2017, the parties filed the attached joint stipulation, stating that a decision should be entered awarding compensation. The undersigned finds the stipulation reasonable and adopts it as the decision of the Court in awarding damages, on the terms set forth therein. Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Stipulation, the undersigned awards the following compensation: A lump sum of $115,000.00 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-00862-UNJ Document 36 Filed 05/10/18 Page 3 of 7 Case 1:16-vv-00862-UNJ Document 36 Filed 05/10/18 Page 4 of 7 Case 1:16-vv-00862-UNJ Document 36 Filed 05/10/18 Page 5 of 7 Case 1:16-vv-00862-UNJ Document 36 Filed 05/10/18 Page 6 of 7 Case 1:16-vv-00862-UNJ Document 36 Filed 05/10/18 Page 7 of 7