VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_17-vv-00290
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_17-vv-00290
Petitioner: Dayna Sotirhos
Filed: 2017-03-01
Decided: 2018-12-03
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 2014-11-11
Condition: Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA)
Outcome: compensated
Award amount USD: 60000

AI-assisted case summary:
On March 1, 2017, Dayna Sotirhos filed a petition in the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, alleging that she suffered a Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA) following her influenza vaccine administered on November 11, 2014. The Respondent initially recommended that Ms. Sotirhos be denied compensation. Ms. Sotirhos amended her petition on December 12, 2017. Although the Respondent maintained that the flu vaccine did not cause her injury, the parties subsequently agreed to participate in settlement negotiations. They filed a stipulation on October 10, 2018, which Special Master Brian H. Corcoran reviewed and adopted as the decision awarding damages. The stipulation awarded Ms. Sotirhos a lump sum of $60,000.00, payable directly to her, as compensation for all damages. The Special Master approved the award, and judgment was to be entered unless a motion for review was filed. Bruce William Sloane represented the Petitioner, and Daniel Anthony Principato represented the Respondent.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioner Dayna Sotirhos alleged that she suffered a Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA) as a result of her November 11, 2014 influenza vaccine. The Respondent initially opposed compensation, maintaining that the flu vaccine did not cause Petitioner's injury. The parties later stipulated to an award of $60,000.00 for all damages. The specific medical mechanism, expert testimony, or detailed clinical facts supporting the causation theory were not described in the public decision, as the case was resolved by stipulation. Special Master Brian H. Corcoran adopted the stipulation as the decision. The decision was issued on December 3, 2018, based on a stipulation filed October 10, 2018. Petitioner was represented by Bruce William Sloane, and Respondent was represented by Daniel Anthony Principato.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_17-vv-00290-0
Date issued/filed: 2018-12-03
Pages: 7
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 10/19/2018) regarding 30 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer. Signed by Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. (mml) Service on parties made.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:17-vv-00290-UNJ Document 35 Filed 12/03/18 Page 1 of 7
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 17-290V
(not to be published)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
DAYNA SOTIRHOS, *
*
* Special Master Corcoran
*
Petitioner, * Filed: October 19, 2018
*
v. *
* Decision by Stipulation; Damages;
SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Influenza (“flu”) Vaccine; Shoulder
AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Injury Related to Vaccine Administration
* (“SIRVA”).
Respondent. *
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Bruce William Sloane, Law Office of Bruce W. Sloane, PC, White Plains, NY, for Petitioner.
Daniel Anthony Principato, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1
On March 1, 2017, Dayna Sotirhos filed a petition seeking compensation under the
National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.2 ECF No. 1. Petitioner alleges that she suffered
from a Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (“SIRVA”) as a result of her November
11, 2014 influenza (“flu”) vaccine. Id. at 1. Respondent initially recommended that Petitioner be
denied compensation in his Rule 4(c) Report. See generally ECF No. 11. Ms. Sotirhos amended
her petition on December 12, 2017. ECF No. 19. Respondent subsequently agreed to participate
1 Although this Decision has been formally designated “not to be published,” it will nevertheless be posted on the
Court of Federal Claims’ website in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002, 44 U.S.C. § 3501 (2012). This
means the Decision 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 1:17-vv-00290-UNJ Document 35 Filed 12/03/18 Page 2 of 7
in settlement negotiations, though he maintained his position that the flu vaccine did not cause
Petitioner’s injury. See Stip. at 1, ECF No. 28. The Parties filed a stipulation on October 10, 2018.
Id.
Based upon my own review of the record, 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 $60,000.00, in the form of a check payable to Petitioner.
Stip. at 2. This amount represents compensation for all damages under Section 15(a) of the Act to
which Petitioner is entitled.
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

CCaassee 11::1177--vvvv--0000229900--UUNNJJ DDooccuummeenntt 2385 FFiilleedd 1102//1083//1188 PPaaggee 13 ooff 57

CCaassee 11::1177--vvvv--0000229900--UUNNJJ DDooccuummeenntt 2385 FFiilleedd 1102//1083//1188 PPaaggee 24 ooff 57

CCaassee 11::1177--vvvv--0000229900--UUNNJJ DDooccuummeenntt 2385 FFiilleedd 1102//1083//1188 PPaaggee 35 ooff 57

CCaassee 11::1177--vvvv--0000229900--UUNNJJ DDooccuummeenntt 2385 FFiilleedd 1102//1083//1188 PPaaggee 46 ooff 57

CCaassee 11::1177--vvvv--0000229900--UUNNJJ DDooccuummeenntt 2385 FFiilleedd 1102//1083//1188 PPaaggee 57 ooff 57