VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_17-vv-01583
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_17-vv-01583
Petitioner: Jose Monsalvez
Filed: 2017-07-20
Decided: 2021-09-02
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 2014-10-22
Condition: neuromuscular weakness and pain
Outcome: compensated
Award amount USD: 2500

AI-assisted case summary:
Jose Monsalvez filed a petition on July 20, 2017, seeking compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. He alleged that he suffered from neuromuscular weakness and pain as a result of an influenza vaccine he received on October 22, 2014. The respondent denied that the influenza vaccine caused Mr. Monsalvez's condition or any other injury. Despite maintaining their respective positions, both parties agreed to settle the case through a joint stipulation dated July 20, 2021. Special Master Katherine E. Oler reviewed the file and concluded that the stipulation was reasonable, adopting it as the decision of the court. The stipulation awarded Mr. Monsalvez a lump sum of $2,500.00, payable to him, as compensation for all damages available under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). The decision was issued on September 2, 2021. The public decision does not describe the specific onset of symptoms, medical examinations, treatments, or expert testimony. Jessica Olins of Maglio, Christopher & Toale P.A. represented the petitioner, and Laurie Wiesner of the U.S. Department of Justice represented the respondent.

Theory of causation field:
Jose Monsalvez alleged that an influenza vaccine administered on October 22, 2014, caused his condition of neuromuscular weakness and pain. The respondent denied causation. The parties reached a settlement via stipulation, and Special Master Katherine E. Oler adopted the stipulation as the decision, awarding $2,500.00 in damages. The public decision does not detail the specific theory of causation, medical experts, or the mechanism by which the vaccine allegedly caused the injury. The award was made pursuant to a stipulation, not a finding of causation on the merits. The decision was issued on September 2, 2021. Petitioner counsel was Jessica Olins, and respondent counsel was Laurie Wiesner.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_17-vv-01583-0
Date issued/filed: 2021-09-02
Pages: 7
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 7/20/2021) regarding 65 DECISION: Stipulation. Signed by Special Master Katherine E. Oler. (nvb) Service on parties made.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:17-vv-01583-UNJ Document 68 Filed 09/02/21 Page 1 of 7
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 17-1583V
(not to be published)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*
*
JOSE MONSALVEZ,
*
* Filed: July 20, 2021
Petitioner, *
*
*
v. * Decision by Stipulation; Damages;
* Influenza (“flu”) Vaccine; Neuromuscular
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND * Weakness; Pain.
HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
*
Respondent. *
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Jessica Olins, Maglio, Christopher & Toale P.A., Seattle WA, for Petitioner
Laurie Wiesner, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent
DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1
On October 20, 2017, Jose Monsalvez (“Petitioner”) filed a petition seeking compensation
under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (“the Vaccine Program”).2 Pet., ECF
No. 1. Petitioner alleges that he suffered from neuromuscular weakness and pain as a result of the
influenza (“flu”) vaccine he received on October 22, 2014. See Stipulation ¶ 2, 4, dated July 20,
2021 (ECF No. 60); see also Petition.
Respondent denies “that the flu vaccine caused Petitioner to suffer neuromuscular
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 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. 3755 (codified as amended at 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-10–34 (2012)) (hereinafter
“Vaccine Act” or “the Act”). All subsequent references to sections of the Vaccine Act shall be to the
pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa.

Case 1:17-vv-01583-UNJ Document 68 Filed 09/02/21 Page 2 of 7
weakness and pain, or any other injury or his current condition.” See Stipulation ¶ 6. Nonetheless,
both parties, while maintaining their above-stated positions, agreed in a stipulation dated July 20,
2021 that the issues before them can be settled and that a decision should be entered awarding
Petitioner compensation. ECF No. 64.
I have reviewed the file, and based upon that review, I conclude that the parties’ stipulation
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 $2,500.00 in the form of a check payable to Petitioner.
Stipulation ¶ 8. This award represents compensation for all damages that would be available under
42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a).
I approve a Vaccine Program award in the requested amounts 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/ Katherine E. Oler
Katherine E. Oler
Special Master
3 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties may expedite entry of judgment by jointly filing notice
renouncing their right to seek review.

Case 1:17-vv-01583-UNJ Document 68 Filed 09/02/21 Page 3 of 7

Case 1:17-vv-01583-UNJ Document 68 Filed 09/02/21 Page 4 of 7

Case 1:17-vv-01583-UNJ Document 68 Filed 09/02/21 Page 5 of 7

Case 1:17-vv-01583-UNJ Document 68 Filed 09/02/21 Page 6 of 7

Case 1:17-vv-01583-UNJ Document 68 Filed 09/02/21 Page 7 of 7