VICP Registry Case Source Bundle Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_18-vv-01057 Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_18-vv-01057 Petitioner: Alcida Ortiz Filed: 2020-12-02 Decided: 2021-02-01 Vaccine: influenza Vaccination date: 2016-09-20 Condition: shoulder injury related to vaccine administration Outcome: compensated Award amount USD: 92500 AI-assisted case summary: Alcida Ortiz filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program on December 2, 2020, alleging she suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) as a result of an influenza vaccine administered on September 20, 2016. Petitioner stated she received the vaccine in the United States, experienced residual effects for more than six months, and had no prior award or settlement for damages related to her condition. The respondent denied that Petitioner sustained a Table SIRVA within the Table time period and denied that the flu vaccine caused her injury or current condition. Despite these denials, on November 25, 2020, the parties filed a joint stipulation for compensation. Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran reviewed the stipulation, found it reasonable, and adopted it as his decision. He awarded Alcida Ortiz a lump sum of $92,500.00, payable to Petitioner, as compensation for all items of damages. The decision was issued on February 1, 2021. Petitioner was represented by Brian L. Cinelli of Marcus & Cinelli, LLP, and Respondent was represented by Catherine Elizabeth Stolar of the U.S. Department of Justice. Theory of causation field: Petitioner Alcida Ortiz alleged a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) following an influenza vaccine on September 20, 2016. Respondent denied that Petitioner sustained a Table SIRVA within the Table time period and denied that the flu vaccine caused her injury. The parties filed a joint stipulation for compensation, and Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran adopted the stipulation, awarding Petitioner $92,500.00. The specific medical mechanism, onset, symptoms, diagnostic tests, treatments, or expert opinions were not described in the provided public decision text. The theory of causation is based on the parties' stipulation rather than a detailed factual finding or expert testimony presented in the decision. Public staged source text: ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_18-vv-01057-0 Date issued/filed: 2021-02-01 Pages: 7 Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 12/02/2020) regarding 35 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. (sw) Service on parties made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:18-vv-01057-UNJ Document 39 Filed 02/01/21 Page 1 of 7 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 18-1057V UNPUBLISHED ALCIDA ORTIZ, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: December 2, 2020 v. Special Processing Unit (SPU); Joint SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND Stipulation on Damages; Influenza HUMAN SERVICES, (Flu) Vaccine; Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration Respondent. (SIRVA) Brian L. Cinelli, Marcus & Cinelli, LLP, Williamsville, NY, for Petitioner. Catherine Elizabeth Stolar, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1 On July 19, 2018, Alcida Ortiz 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 a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) as a result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccine administered on September 20, 2016. Petition at 1; Stipulation, filed on November 25, 2020, ¶¶ 2, 4. Petitioner further alleges she received the vaccine in the United States, that she experienced the residual effects of her injury 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 alleged condition. Petition at 1-2; Stipulation at ¶¶ 3-5. “Respondent denies that [P]etitioner sustained a Table SIRVA within the Table time period, and further denies that the flu vaccine caused [P]etitioner to suffer a left shoulder injury or any other injury or her current condition.” Stipulation at ¶ 6. 1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am 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). 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, I agree that the identified material fits within this definition, I 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 1:18-vv-01057-UNJ Document 39 Filed 02/01/21 Page 2 of 7 Nevertheless, on November 25, 2020, 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 my decision 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 $92,500.00 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 Section 15(a). Id. I approve 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/Brian H. Corcoran Brian H. Corcoran 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 1:18-vv-01057-UNJ Document 39 Filed 02/01/21 Page 3 of 7 Case 1:18-vv-01057-UNJ Document 39 Filed 02/01/21 Page 4 of 7 Case 1:18-vv-01057-UNJ Document 39 Filed 02/01/21 Page 5 of 7 Case 1:18-vv-01057-UNJ Document 39 Filed 02/01/21 Page 6 of 7 Case 1:18-vv-01057-UNJ Document 39 Filed 02/01/21 Page 7 of 7