VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_16-vv-01389
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_16-vv-01389
Petitioner: Ritu Bhatia-Nunez
Filed: 2017-05-11
Decided: 2017-12-13
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 
Condition: Guillain-Barre Syndrome
Outcome: compensated
Award amount USD: 150000

AI-assisted case summary:
Ritu Bhatia-Nunez filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program on May 11, 2017, alleging she suffered from Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS) following an influenza vaccination. The petition stated that the vaccine was administered in the United States, that she experienced residual effects for more than six months, and that there had been no prior award or settlement of a civil action for damages. The respondent denied that the flu immunization caused petitioner's alleged GBS and/or any other injuries. Despite the respondent's denial, the parties filed a joint stipulation on May 10, 2017, agreeing that a decision should be entered awarding compensation. Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey reviewed the stipulation and found it reasonable, adopting it as the decision of the Court. Pursuant to the stipulation, the court awarded Ritu Bhatia-Nunez a lump sum of $150,000.00, payable by check to the petitioner, as compensation for all items of damages available under the Vaccine Act. The decision was issued on December 13, 2017. Petitioner was represented by Alison Haskins of Maglio Christopher and Toale, PA, and respondent was represented by Daniel Principato of the U.S. Department of Justice. The public decision does not describe the specific date of vaccination, the onset of symptoms, specific clinical details, diagnostic tests, treatments, or the medical experts consulted.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioner Ritu Bhatia-Nunez alleged Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS) following an influenza vaccination. The respondent denied causation. The parties filed a joint stipulation agreeing to an award. The Special Master adopted the stipulation. The award was $150,000.00. The public decision does not specify the vaccination date, age, specific GBS onset or symptoms, diagnostic findings, treatments, or the mechanism of injury. No experts are named in the public text. The theory of causation is not detailed in the public decision, which relies on a stipulation for compensation.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_16-vv-01389-0
Date issued/filed: 2017-12-13
Pages: 7
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 05/11/2017) regarding 20 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer ( Signed by Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey.)(mpj) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:16-vv-01389-UNJ Document 28 Filed 12/13/17 Page 1 of 7
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 16-1389V
Filed: May 11, 2017
UNPUBLISHED
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
RITU BHATIA-NUNEZ, *
*
Petitioner, * Joint Stipulation on Damages;
v. * Influenza (“Flu”); Guillain-Barre
* Syndrome (“GBS”);
SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Special Processing Unit (“SPU”)
AND HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
Respondent. *
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Alison Haskins, Maglio Christopher and Toale, PA, Sarasota, FL, for petitioner.
Daniel Principato, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1
Dorsey, Chief Special Master:
On October 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 from Guillain-Barre Syndrome
(“GBS”) following an influenza (“flu”) vaccination. Petition at 1, 4; Stipulation, filed May
10, 2017, at ¶¶ 2, 4. Petitioner further alleges that the vaccine was administered within
the United States, that she experienced the residual effects of this condition for more
than six months, and that there has been no prior award or settlement of a civil action
for damages as a result of her condition. Petition at 1, 5; Stipulation at ¶¶ 3-5.
“Respondent denies that the flu immunization is the cause of petitioner’s alleged GBS
and/or any other injuries.” Stipulation at ¶ 6.
Nevertheless, on May 10, 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-01389-UNJ Document 28 Filed 12/13/17 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.
Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Stipulation, the undersigned
awards 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-01389-UNJ Document 28 Filed 12/13/17 Page 3 of 7

Case 1:16-vv-01389-UNJ Document 28 Filed 12/13/17 Page 4 of 7

Case 1:16-vv-01389-UNJ Document 28 Filed 12/13/17 Page 5 of 7

Case 1:16-vv-01389-UNJ Document 28 Filed 12/13/17 Page 6 of 7

Case 1:16-vv-01389-UNJ Document 28 Filed 12/13/17 Page 7 of 7