VICP Registry Case Source Bundle Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_19-vv-00415 Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_19-vv-00415 Petitioner: Tonya LeMay Filed: 2019-03-19 Decided: 2021-02-26 Vaccine: influenza Vaccination date: 2016-11-04 Condition: shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) Outcome: compensated Award amount USD: 85000 AI-assisted case summary: Tonya LeMay filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program on March 19, 2019. She alleged that she suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) after receiving an influenza vaccine on November 4, 2016. Ms. LeMay claimed that her injury met the definition for a Table SIRVA Injury and that she experienced residual effects for more than six months. The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, denied that the flu vaccine caused Ms. LeMay's injury and denied that she sustained a SIRVA Table Injury. The parties subsequently filed a joint stipulation on January 12, 2021, agreeing that compensation should be awarded. Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran reviewed the stipulation and found it reasonable, adopting it as his decision. He awarded Tonya LeMay a lump sum of $85,000.00, payable by check, as compensation for all items of damages. The decision was issued on February 26, 2021. Ronald Craig Homer represented the petitioner, and Kyle Edward Pozza represented the respondent. Theory of causation field: Petitioner Tonya LeMay alleged a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) following an influenza vaccine on November 4, 2016. The injury was alleged to meet the definition of a Table SIRVA Injury and resulted in residual effects lasting more than six months. Respondent denied causation. The parties filed a joint stipulation agreeing to an award. Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran adopted the stipulation, awarding $85,000.00. The public decision does not detail the specific mechanism of injury, expert testimony, or clinical findings. Petitioner counsel was Ronald Craig Homer, and respondent counsel was Kyle Edward Pozza. The decision date was February 26, 2021. Public staged source text: ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_19-vv-00415-0 Date issued/filed: 2021-02-26 Pages: 7 Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 01/12/2021) regarding 32 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. (sw) Service on parties made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:19-vv-00415-UNJ Document 36 Filed 02/26/21 Page 1 of 7 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 19-0415V UNPUBLISHED TONYA LEMAY, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: January 12, 2021 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) Ronald Craig Homer, Conway, Homer, P.C., Boston, MA, for petitioner. Kyle Edward Pozza, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent. DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1 On March 19, 2019, Tonya LeMay 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”) which meets the definition for a Table SIRVA Injury after receiving the influenza vaccine on November 4, 2016. Petition at 1; Stipulation, filed at Jan. 12, 2021, ¶¶ 1-2, 4. Petitioner further alleges she received the vaccination in the United States, that she suffered the residual effects of her injury for more than six months, and that neither she nor any other party has filed a civil action or received an award for her injury. Petition at ¶¶ 2, 26-28; Stipulation at ¶¶ 3-5. “Respondent denies that the flu vaccine caused [P]etitioner to suffer a left shoulder injury or any other injury, and denies that [P]etitioner sustained a SIRVA Table 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 1:19-vv-00415-UNJ Document 36 Filed 02/26/21 Page 2 of 7 Nevertheless, on January 12, 2021, 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 $85,000.00 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 1:19-vv-00415-UNJ Document 36 Filed 02/26/21 Page 3 of 7 Case 1:19-vv-00415-UNJ Document 36 Filed 02/26/21 Page 4 of 7 Case 1:19-vv-00415-UNJ Document 36 Filed 02/26/21 Page 5 of 7 Case 1:19-vv-00415-UNJ Document 36 Filed 02/26/21 Page 6 of 7 Case 1:19-vv-00415-UNJ Document 36 Filed 02/26/21 Page 7 of 7