VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_17-vv-01592
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_17-vv-01592
Petitioner: Barbara van Esler
Filed: 2017-10-24
Decided: 2019-09-11
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 2016-10-05
Condition: shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA)
Outcome: compensated
Award amount USD: 80000

AI-assisted case summary:
On October 24, 2017, Barbara Van Esler filed a petition under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program alleging that the influenza vaccine she received on October 5, 2016, caused her to develop a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) with residual effects lasting more than six months. The respondent denied that the flu immunization caused the alleged SIRVA. On June 11, 2019, the parties filed a joint stipulation agreeing that compensation should be awarded. The Chief Special Master, Nora Beth Dorsey, found the stipulation reasonable and adopted it as the decision of the Court. Barbara Van Esler was awarded a lump sum of $80,000.00, payable to her, as compensation for all items of damages. Petitioner's counsel was Maximillian J. Muller of Muller Brazil, LLP, and respondent's counsel was Ryan Daniel Pyles of the U.S. Department of Justice. The public decision does not describe the specific onset of symptoms, medical examinations, diagnostic tests, treatments, or the specific mechanism of injury. The public decision also does not name any medical experts for either party.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioner Barbara Van Esler alleged that an influenza vaccine administered on October 5, 2016, caused a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) with residual effects lasting more than six months. Respondent denied causation. The parties filed a joint stipulation on June 11, 2019, agreeing to an award of compensation. Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey adopted the stipulation as the decision of the Court. Petitioner was awarded a lump sum of $80,000.00. The public decision does not detail the specific theory of causation, medical experts, or the mechanism of injury, stating only that the respondent denied causation. The case was resolved via stipulation, and the public text does not provide further details on the evidence presented or the specific reasoning for the award beyond the agreement of the parties.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_17-vv-01592-0
Date issued/filed: 2019-09-11
Pages: 7
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 06/21/2019) regarding 38 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer ( Signed by Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey. )(mpj) Service on parties made.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:17-vv-01592-UNJ Document 47 Filed 09/11/19 Page 1 of 7
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 17-1592V
Filed: June 21, 2019
UNPUBLISHED
BARBARA VAN ESLER,
Petitioner,
Special Processing Unit (SPU); Joint
v.
Stipulation on Damages; Influenza
(Flu) Vaccine; Shoulder Injury
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND
Related to Vaccine Administration
HUMAN SERVICES,
(SIRVA)
Respondent.
Maximillian J. Muller, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA, for petitioner.
Ryan Daniel Pyles, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1
Dorsey, Chief Special Master:
On October 24, 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 the influenza (“flu”) vaccine she received on
October 5, 2016, caused her to develop a shoulder injury related to vaccine
administration (“SIRVA”) and that she experienced residual effects of this injury for more
than six months. Petition at 1,3; Stipulation, filed June 11, 2019, at ¶ 4. “Respondent
denies that the flu immunization is the cause of petitioner's alleged SIRVA and/or any
other injury.” Stipulation at ¶ 6.
Nevertheless, on June 11, 2019, the parties filed the attached joint stipulation,
stating that a decision should be entered awarding compensation. The undersigned
1 The undersigned intends to post this decision on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website.
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, upon review, the
undersigned agrees that the identified material fits within this definition, the undersigned will redact such
material from public access. Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the
action in this case, undersigned is required 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).
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-01592-UNJ Document 47 Filed 09/11/19 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 $80,000.00 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.
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 1:17-vv-01592-UNJ Document 47 Filed 09/11/19 Page 3 of 7

Case 1:17-vv-01592-UNJ Document 47 Filed 09/11/19 Page 4 of 7

Case 1:17-vv-01592-UNJ Document 47 Filed 09/11/19 Page 5 of 7

Case 1:17-vv-01592-UNJ Document 47 Filed 09/11/19 Page 6 of 7

Case 1:17-vv-01592-UNJ Document 47 Filed 09/11/19 Page 7 of 7