VICP Registry Case Source Bundle Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_19-vv-01314 Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_19-vv-01314 Petitioner: Philip Herman Filed: 2019-08-29 Decided: 2022-06-28 Vaccine: influenza Vaccination date: 2017-11-09 Condition: shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) Outcome: compensated Award amount USD: 60317 AI-assisted case summary: Philip Herman filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program on August 29, 2019, alleging he suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) from an influenza vaccination received on November 9, 2017. Mr. Herman stated that the vaccination was administered in the United States, his symptoms lasted more than six months, and no other action had been filed for his injury. The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, denied that Mr. Herman sustained a SIRVA Table injury, denied that the vaccine caused his alleged shoulder injury or any other injury, and denied that his current condition was a sequela of a vaccine-related injury. Despite these denials, the parties filed a joint stipulation on June 27, 2022, agreeing to an award of compensation. Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran reviewed the stipulation, found it reasonable, and adopted it as the court's decision. Mr. Herman was awarded a lump sum of $60,317.24, payable to him, as compensation for all damages available under Section 15(a) of the Vaccine Act. The decision was issued on June 28, 2022. Petitioner was represented by Jimmy A. Zgheib of Zgheib Sayad, P.C., and Respondent was represented by Madelyn Weeks of the U.S. Department of Justice. The public decision does not describe the specific onset of symptoms, medical tests, treatments, or expert witnesses. Theory of causation field: Petitioner Philip Herman alleged a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) following an influenza vaccination on November 9, 2017. The respondent denied a SIRVA Table injury and that the vaccine caused the alleged injury. The case proceeded to a joint stipulation on damages, which was adopted by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran on June 28, 2022. The stipulation resulted in an award of $60,317.24 to Petitioner. The public text indicates the theory of causation was based on the "Table" for SIRVA, but does not detail the specific mechanism, expert testimony, or evidence presented beyond the stipulation. Petitioner was represented by Jimmy A. Zgheib, and Respondent by Madelyn Weeks. Public staged source text: ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_19-vv-01314-0 Date issued/filed: 2022-07-29 Pages: 7 Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 06/28/2022) regarding 33 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer ( Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. )(mpj) Service on parties made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:19-vv-01314-UNJ Document 39 Filed 07/29/22 Page 1 of 7 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 19-1314V UNPUBLISHED PHILIP HERMAN, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: June 28, 2022 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) Jimmy A. Zgheib, Zgheib Sayad, P.C., White Plains, NY, for Petitioner. Madelyn Weeks, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1 On August 29, 2019, Philip Herman 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 he suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) resulting from the adverse effects of an influenza (flu) vaccination he received on November 9, 2017. Petition at 1; Stipulation, filed at June 27, 2022, ¶¶ 1-2. Petitioner further alleges that the vaccination was administered within the United States, his symptoms lasted for more than six months, and that neither he, nor any other party, has ever filed any action for Petitioner’s vaccine-related injury. Petition at 1, 6; Stipulation at ¶¶ 3-5. “Respondent denies that [P]etitioner sustained a SIRVA Table injury; denies that the vaccine caused [P]etitioner’s alleged shoulder injury, or any other injury; and denies that his current condition is a sequela 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 section references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa (2012). Case 1:19-vv-01314-UNJ Document 39 Filed 07/29/22 Page 2 of 7 Nevertheless, on June 27, 2022, 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 $60,317.24 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 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-01314-UNJ Document 39 Filed 07/29/22 Page 3 of 7 Case 1:19-vv-01314-UNJ Document 39 Filed 07/29/22 Page 4 of 7 Case 1:19-vv-01314-UNJ Document 39 Filed 07/29/22 Page 5 of 7 Case 1:19-vv-01314-UNJ Document 39 Filed 07/29/22 Page 6 of 7 Case 1:19-vv-01314-UNJ Document 39 Filed 07/29/22 Page 7 of 7