VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_19-vv-00235
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_19-vv-00235
Petitioner: Kristina Aycock
Filed: 2019-02-12
Decided: 2021-04-29
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 2017-10-03
Condition: right shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA)
Outcome: compensated
Award amount USD: 53203

AI-assisted case summary:
Kristina Aycock filed a petition for compensation on February 12, 2019, alleging a right shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) after receiving an influenza vaccine on October 3, 2017. She claimed the injury occurred within the timeframe specified in the Vaccine Injury Table or was caused by the vaccine, and that she experienced residual effects for over six months. The respondent denied that the petitioner suffered a SIRVA Table injury or that the flu vaccine caused her condition. Despite these denials, the parties reached a stipulation to settle the case. Special Master Thomas L. Gowen adopted the stipulation, awarding Kristina Aycock a lump sum of $53,203.93 for all damages. Judgment was entered accordingly. The public decision does not describe the specific onset of symptoms, medical examinations, diagnostic tests, or treatments received by the petitioner. Petitioner was represented by Leah V. Durant of the Law Offices of Leah V. Durant, PLLC, and respondent was represented by Christine M. Becer of the United States Department of Justice.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioner Kristina Aycock received an influenza vaccine on October 3, 2017, and alleged a right shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) within the Vaccine Injury Table timeframe or caused by the vaccine, with residual effects lasting over six months. Respondent denied the injury was a SIRVA Table injury or vaccine-caused. The parties reached a stipulation to settle the case. The stipulation awarded petitioner $53,203.93. Special Master Thomas L. Gowen adopted the stipulation. The public decision does not detail the specific mechanism of injury, medical experts, or evidence presented beyond the stipulation. The theory of causation is based on the "Table" category for SIRVA.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_19-vv-00235-0
Date issued/filed: 2021-05-20
Pages: 7
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 4/29/21) regarding 34 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer Signed by Special Master Thomas L. Gowen. (kb) Service on parties made.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:19-vv-00235-UNJ Document 38 Filed 05/20/21 Page 1 of 7
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
Filed: April 29, 2021
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
KRISTINA AYCOCK, * UNPUBLISHED
*
Petitioner, * No. 19-235V
*
v. * Special Master Gowen
*
SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Stipulation; Influenza (Flu);
AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Shoulder Injury Related to
* Vaccine Administration (SIRVA).
Respondent. *
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
Leah V. Durant, Law Offices of Leah V. Durant, PLLC, Washington, D.C., for petitioner.
Christine M. Becer, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for respondent.
DECISION ON STIPULATION1
On February 12, 2019, Kristina Aycock (“petitioner”), filed a petition for compensation
in the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.2 Petition (ECF No. 1). Petitioner
received an influenza (“flu”) vaccine, which vaccine is contained in the Vaccine Injury Table
(the “Table”), on October 3, 2017. Petitioner alleges that she sustained a right shoulder injury
related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) within the time period set forth in the Table, or in
the alternative, that her alleged shoulder injury was caused by the vaccine. She further alleges
that she experienced the residual effects of this condition for more than six months.
On April 28, 2021, respondent filed a stipulation which provides that a decision should be
entered awarding compensation to petitioner. Stipulation (ECF No. 33). Respondent denies that
petitioner suffered a SIRVA Table injury. Id. at ¶ 6. Respondent also denies that the flu vaccine
1
Pursuant to the E-Government Act of 2002, see 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012), because this opinion contains a
reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I intend to post it on the website of the United States Court of
Federal Claims. The Court’s website is at http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/aggregator/sources/7. Before the opinion
is posted on the Court’s website, each party has 14 days to file a motion requesting 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). An objecting party must provide the Court with a proposed
redacted version of the opinion. Id. If neither party files a motion for redaction within 14 days, the opinion will
be posted on the Court’s website without any changes. Id.
2 The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program is set forth in Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine
Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755, codified as amended 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-10 to 34 (2012)
(hereinafter “Vaccine Act” or “the Act”). Hereinafter, individual section references will be to 42 U.S.C. § 300aa of
the Act.

Case 1:19-vv-00235-UNJ Document 38 Filed 05/20/21 Page 2 of 7
caused petitioner to suffer from a right shoulder injury or any other injury or her current
condition. Id. Maintaining their above-stated positions, the parties nevertheless now agree that
the issues between them shall be settled and that a decision should be entered awarding the
compensation described in paragraph 8 of the stipulation, which is attached hereto as Appendix
A. Id. at ¶ 7.
The stipulation awards a lump sum of $53,203.93 in the form of a check payable to
petitioner. This lump sum represents compensation for all damages that would be available
under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a).
I adopt the stipulation as the decision of the Court and hereby award compensation in the
amount and on the terms set forth therein. Accordingly, the Clerk of Court SHALL ENTER
JUDGMENT in accordance with the terms of the parties’ stipulation.3
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Thomas L. Gowen
Thomas L. Gowen
Special Master
3 Entry of judgment is expedited by each party’s filing notice renouncing the right to seek review. Vaccine Rule
11(a).
2

Case 1:19-vv-00235-UNJ Document 38 Filed 05/20/21 Page 3 of 7

Case 1:19-vv-00235-UNJ Document 38 Filed 05/20/21 Page 4 of 7

Case 1:19-vv-00235-UNJ Document 38 Filed 05/20/21 Page 5 of 7

Case 1:19-vv-00235-UNJ Document 38 Filed 05/20/21 Page 6 of 7

Case 1:19-vv-00235-UNJ Document 38 Filed 05/20/21 Page 7 of 7