VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_19-vv-01070
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_19-vv-01070
Petitioner: Douglas Bell
Filed: 2019-07-24
Decided: 2021-10-19
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 2017-11-29
Condition: vaccine-induced neuropathy, tendonitis, right scapular dysfunction, and brachial neuritis
Outcome: compensated
Award amount USD: 90000

AI-assisted case summary:
Douglas Bell filed a petition on July 24, 2019, alleging that an influenza vaccine administered on November 29, 2017, caused him to develop vaccine-induced neuropathy, tendonitis, right scapular dysfunction, and brachial neuritis. The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, denied that the flu vaccine caused or significantly aggravated these conditions or any other injury. Despite denying causation, the parties filed a joint stipulation recommending an award of compensation. Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey reviewed the stipulation and found it reasonable, adopting it as the decision of the Court. The public decision does not describe the specific onset of symptoms, clinical course, diagnostic tests, treatments, or expert witnesses. Douglas Bell was awarded $90,000.00 as a lump sum payment, representing compensation for all damages available under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). The parties renounced the right to seek review, and judgment was entered accordingly. Mark Theodore Sadaka represented the petitioner, and Camille Collett represented the respondent.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioner Douglas Bell alleged that an influenza vaccine administered on November 29, 2017, caused vaccine-induced neuropathy, tendonitis, right scapular dysfunction, and brachial neuritis. Respondent denied causation. The parties filed a joint stipulation for compensation, which Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey found reasonable and adopted. The public decision does not specify the theory of causation, the mechanism of injury, or name any experts. The award was $90,000.00 as a lump sum. The decision was based on a stipulation, not on a finding of causation after litigation. Attorneys involved were Mark Theodore Sadaka for the petitioner and Camille Collett for the respondent. Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey issued the decision on October 19, 2021.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_19-vv-01070-0
Date issued/filed: 2021-11-15
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 10/19/2021) regarding 69 DECISION Stipulation. Signed by Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey. (Attachments: # (1) Appendix A)(mca) Service on parties made.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:19-vv-01070-UNJ Document 74 Filed 11/15/21 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
Filed: October 19, 2021
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
DOUGLAS BELL, * UNPUBLISHED
*
Petitioner, * No. 19-1070V
*
v. * Special Master Dorsey
*
SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Decision Based on Stipulation;
AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Influenza (“Flu”) Vaccine;
* Neuropathy; Tendonitis; Right
Respondent. * Scapular Dysfunction; Brachial
* Neuritis.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Mark Theodore Sadaka, Law Offices of Sadaka Associates, LLC, Englewood, NJ, for petitioner.
Camille Collett, US Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
DECISION BASED ON STIPULATION1
On July 24, 2019, Douglas Bell (“petitioner”) filed a petition in the National Vaccine
Injury Compensation Program.2 Petitioner alleged that as a result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccine
on November 29, 2017, he developed “vaccine-induced neuropathy, tendonitis, right scapular
dysfunction, and brachial neuritis.” Petition at Preamble (ECF No. 1).
On October 19, 2021, the parties filed a stipulation recommending an award of
compensation to petitioner. Stipulation (ECF No. 68). Respondent denies that the flu vaccine
cause, or significantly aggravated, petitioner’s alleged vaccine-induced neuropathy, tendonitis,
1 Because this Decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the
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). 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.
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-1 to -34 (2012) (“Vaccine Act” or “the Act”). All citations in this Decision
to individual sections of the Vaccine Act are to 42 U.S.C. § 300aa.
1

Case 1:19-vv-01070-UNJ Document 74 Filed 11/15/21 Page 2 of 2
right scapular dysfunction, and/or brachial neuritis. Respondent further denies that the flu
vaccine cause petitioner to suffer from any other injury or his current condition. Nevertheless,
the parties agree to the joint stipulation, attached hereto as Appendix A. The undersigned finds
the stipulation reasonable and adopts it as the decision of the Court in awarding damages, on the
terms set forth therein.
The parties stipulate that petitioner shall receive the following compensation:
(1) A lump sum of $90,000.00 in the form of a check payable to petitioner.
This amount represents compensation for all damages that would be available under 42
U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). Stipulation at ¶ 8.
The undersigned approves the requested amount for petitioner’s compensation.
Accordingly, an award should be made consistent with the stipulation.
In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the Clerk of
Court SHALL ENTER JUDGMENT in accordance with the terms of the parties’ stipulation.3
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Nora B. Dorsey
Nora B. Dorsey
Special Master
3 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment is expedited by the parties’ joint filing of
notice renouncing the right to seek review.
2