VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_17-vv-01351
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_17-vv-01351
Petitioner: Yukiko Boquet
Filed: 2017-09-27
Decided: 2021-10-13
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 2016-09-22
Condition: Guillain Barre Syndrome (GBS)
Outcome: compensated
Award amount USD: 205000

AI-assisted case summary:
Yukiko Boquet filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program on September 27, 2017, alleging she suffered Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS) as a result of her September 22, 2016 influenza vaccination. Petitioner alleged residual effects lasting more than six months, that no civil action had been filed, and that the vaccine was administered in the United States. Respondent denied that petitioner sustained a GBS Table injury and denied that the flu immunization caused her GBS or any other injury or condition. Despite the denials, the parties filed a joint stipulation on September 14, 2021, agreeing to an award of compensation. Special Master Daniel T. Horner found the stipulation reasonable and adopted it as the decision of the Court. Pursuant to the stipulation, Yukiko Boquet was awarded a lump sum of $205,000.00, payable by check to petitioner, for all items of damages. Petitioner was represented by Leah VaSahnja Durant of the Law Offices of Leah V. Durant, PLLC, and respondent was represented by Camille Michelle Collett of the U.S. Department of Justice. The public decision does not describe the onset of symptoms, specific clinical details, diagnostic tests, treatments, or expert witnesses.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioner Yukiko Boquet alleged that her September 22, 2016 influenza vaccination caused Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS) with residual effects lasting more than six months. Respondent denied that petitioner sustained a GBS Table injury and denied that the flu immunization caused her GBS or any other injury. The parties filed a joint stipulation on September 14, 2021, agreeing to compensation. Special Master Daniel T. Horner adopted the stipulation, awarding a lump sum of $205,000.00 to petitioner. The public decision does not detail the specific theory of causation, medical experts, or the mechanism by which the vaccine allegedly caused the GBS. Petitioner was represented by Leah VaSahnja Durant and respondent by Camille Michelle Collett.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_17-vv-01351-0
Date issued/filed: 2021-10-13
Pages: 7
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 9/15/52021) regarding 70 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer. Signed by Special Master Daniel T. Horner. (tkp) Service on parties made.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:17-vv-01351-UNJ Document 71 Filed 10/13/21 Page 1 of 7
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 17-1351V
Filed: September 15, 2021
UNPUBLISHED
YUKIKO BOQUET,
Petitioner,
Joint Stipulation on Damages;
v.
Influenza (Flu) Vaccine; Guillain-
Barre Syndrome (GBS)
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES,
Respondent.
Leah VaSahnja Durant, Law Offices of Leah V. Durant, PLLC, Washington, DC, for
petitioner.
Camille Michelle Collett, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1
On September 27, 2017, 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”) as
a result of her September 22, 2016 influenza (“flu”) vaccination. Petition at 1;
Stipulation, filed September 14, 2021, at ¶¶ 1, 4. Petitioner further alleges she has
experienced the residual effects of her condition for more than six months, that there
has been no prior award or settlement of a civil action for damages as a result of her
condition, and that her vaccine was administered in the united states. Petition at 1, 5;
Stipulation at ¶¶ 3-5. “Respondent denies that petitioner sustained a GBS Tale injury,
and further denies that the flu immunization is the cause of petitioner’s alleged GBS or
any other injury or condition. ” Stipulation at ¶ 6.
1 Because this decision contains a reasoned explanation for the special master’s action in this case, it will
be posted on the United States Court of Federal Claims’ website in accordance with the E-Government
Act of 2002. See 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of Electronic
Government Services). This means the decision will be available to anyone with access to the
Internet. 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 the special master, upon review, agrees that the identified material fits within this definition, it will be
redacted 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 1:17-vv-01351-UNJ Document 71 Filed 10/13/21 Page 2 of 7
Nevertheless, on September 14, 2021, the parties filed the attached joint
stipulation, stating that a decision should be entered awarding compensation. I find the
stipulation reasonable and adopt 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, I award the following
compensation:
A lump sum of $205,000.00 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 § 15(a). Id.
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/Daniel T. Horner
Daniel T. Horner
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 1:17-vv-01351-UNJ Document 71 Filed 10/13/21 Page 3 of 7

Case 1:17-vv-01351-UNJ Document 71 Filed 10/13/21 Page 4 of 7

Case 1:17-vv-01351-UNJ Document 71 Filed 10/13/21 Page 5 of 7

Case 1:17-vv-01351-UNJ Document 71 Filed 10/13/21 Page 6 of 7

Case 1:17-vv-01351-UNJ Document 71 Filed 10/13/21 Page 7 of 7