VICP Registry Case Source Bundle Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_18-vv-01919 Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_18-vv-01919 Petitioner: Patricia Botic Filed: 2020-07-22 Decided: 2020-08-25 Vaccine: influenza Vaccination date: 2016-10-03 Condition: left shoulder injury related to vaccine administration Outcome: compensated Award amount USD: 50000 AI-assisted case summary: Patricia Botic filed a petition for compensation on July 22, 2020, alleging that she suffered a left shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) caused by the influenza vaccine she received on October 3, 2016. The petition stated that the vaccination occurred in the United States, that the residual effects of the SIRVA lasted for more than six months, and that no civil action had been filed nor other compensation received for the alleged vaccine-related injury. The respondent denied that petitioner sustained a SIRVA Table injury, denied that the vaccine caused her alleged shoulder injuries or any other injury, and denied that her current condition was a sequelae of a vaccine-related injury. Despite these denials, on July 22, 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 Patricia Botic a lump sum of $50,000.00, payable to Petitioner, as compensation for all items of damages. The decision was issued on August 25, 2020. Petitioner was represented by Amy A. Senerth of Muller Brazil, LLP, and respondent was represented by Claudia Barnes Gangi of the U.S. Department of Justice. Theory of causation field: Petitioner Patricia Botic alleged a left shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) caused by an influenza vaccine received on October 3, 2016. The respondent denied a Table injury or that the vaccine caused the alleged shoulder injuries. The parties filed a joint stipulation for compensation, which was approved by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran on August 25, 2020. The stipulation resulted in an award of $50,000.00. The specific theory of causation, medical experts, or detailed clinical facts regarding the onset, symptoms, tests, or treatments are not described in the provided public decision text, which indicates the case was resolved via stipulation. The decision does not specify if the theory was off-Table or based on a specific mechanism beyond the general allegation of SIRVA. Public staged source text: ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_18-vv-01919-0 Date issued/filed: 2020-08-25 Pages: 7 Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 07/22/2020) regarding 23 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. (sw) Service on parties made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:18-vv-01919-UNJ Document 27 Filed 08/25/20 Page 1 of 7 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 18-1919V UNPUBLISHED PATRICIA BOTIC, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: July 22, 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) Amy A. Senerth, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA, for petitioner. Claudia Barnes Gangi, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent. DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1 On December 14, 2018, Patricia Botic 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 left shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) caused-in-fact by the influenza vaccine she received on October 3, 2016. Petition at 1, ¶¶ 2, 25; Stipulation, filed at July 22, 2020, ¶¶ 1-2, 4. Petitioner further alleges that she received the vaccination in the United States, that she suffered the residual effects of her SIRVA for more than six months, and that neither she nor any other party has filed a civil action or received compensation for her SIRVA, alleged as vaccine caused. Petition at ¶¶ 2, 25-27; Stipulation at ¶¶ 3-5. “Respondent denies that petitioner sustained a SIRVA Table injury; denies that the vaccine cause petitioner’s alleged shoulder injuries, or any other injury; and denies that her current condition is a sequelae of a vaccine-related injury.” 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-01919-UNJ Document 27 Filed 08/25/20 Page 2 of 7 Nevertheless, on July 22, 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 $50,000.00 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 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-01919-UNJ Document 27 Filed 08/25/20 Page 3 of 7 Case 1:18-vv-01919-UNJ Document 27 Filed 08/25/20 Page 4 of 7 Case 1:18-vv-01919-UNJ Document 27 Filed 08/25/20 Page 5 of 7 Case 1:18-vv-01919-UNJ Document 27 Filed 08/25/20 Page 6 of 7 Case 1:18-vv-01919-UNJ Document 27 Filed 08/25/20 Page 7 of 7