VICP Registry Case Source Bundle Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_20-vv-01133 Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_20-vv-01133 Petitioner: Quatina Battle Filed: 2020-09-03 Decided: 2023-04-20 Vaccine: Tdap Vaccination date: 2018-08-15 Condition: shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) Outcome: compensated Award amount USD: 39131 AI-assisted case summary: Quatina Battle filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program on September 3, 2020. She alleged that she suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) as a result of a tetanus (Tdap) vaccination she received on August 15, 2018. Ms. Battle further alleged that her injury lasted longer than six months. Respondent denied that Petitioner sustained a SIRVA Table injury, denied that the Td vaccine caused her alleged SIRVA or any other injury, and denied that her current condition was a sequelae of a vaccine-related injury. Despite these denials, the parties filed a joint stipulation on March 20, 2023, agreeing that a decision should be entered awarding compensation. The Chief Special Master found the stipulation reasonable and adopted it as the decision awarding damages. Ms. Battle was awarded a lump sum of $39,131.50, representing compensation for all items of damages available under Section 15(a) of the Vaccine Act. The case proceeded as a Table claim, and the parties stipulated to the award amount. Theory of causation field: Table Public staged source text: ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_20-vv-01133-0 Date issued/filed: 2023-04-20 Pages: 7 Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 03/20/2023) regarding 43 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer. Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. (tlf) Service on parties made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:20-vv-01133-UNJ Document 47 Filed 04/20/23 Page 1 of 7 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 20-1133V UNPUBLISHED QUATINA BATTLE, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: March 20, 2023 v. Special Processing Unit (SPU); Joint SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND Stipulation on Damages; Tetanus HUMAN SERVICES, Diphtheria acellular Pertussis (Tdap) Vaccine; Shoulder Injury Related to Respondent. Vaccine Administration (SIRVA) Leah VaSahnja Durant, Law Offices of Leah V. Durant, PLLC, Washington, DC, for Petitioner. Nancy Tinch, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1 On September 3, 2020, Quatina Battle 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”) as a result of a tetanus (Tdap) vaccination she received on August 15, 2018. Petition at 1; Stipulation, filed at March 20, 2023, ¶¶ 2, 4. Petitioner further alleges that her injury has lasted longer than six months. Petition at ¶9; Stipulation at ¶4. Respondent denies “that Petitioner sustained a SIRVA Table injury; denies that the Td vaccine caused Petitioner’s alleged SIRVA, or any other injury; and denies that Petitioner’s current condition is a sequelae of a vaccine-related injury.” Stipulation at ¶ 6. Nevertheless, on March 20, 2023, 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. 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 1:20-vv-01133-UNJ Document 47 Filed 04/20/23 Page 2 of 7 Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Stipulation, I award the following compensation: A lump sum of $39,131.50 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 1:20-vv-01133-UNJ Document 47 Filed 04/20/23 Page 3 of 7 Case 1:20-vv-01133-UNJ Document 47 Filed 04/20/23 Page 4 of 7 Case 1:20-vv-01133-UNJ Document 47 Filed 04/20/23 Page 5 of 7 Case 1:20-vv-01133-UNJ Document 47 Filed 04/20/23 Page 6 of 7 Case 1:20-vv-01133-UNJ Document 47 Filed 04/20/23 Page 7 of 7 ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 2: USCOURTS-cofc-1_20-vv-01133-cl-extra-10736636 Date issued/filed: 2024-01-02 Pages: 1 Docket text: Supplementary opinion from CourtListener cluster 10270046 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 20-1133V QUATINA BATTLE, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, v. Filed: November 28, 2023 SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Leah VaSahnja Durant, Law Offices of Leah V. Durant, PLLC, Washington, DC, for Petitioner. Darryl R. Wishard, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION ON ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS 1 On September 3, 2020, Quatina Battle 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 alleged that she suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration as a result of a tetanus vaccination she received on August 15, 2018. Petition, ECF No. 1. On March 20, 2023, I issued a decision awarding compensation to Petitioner based on the parties’ stipulation. ECF No. 43. 1 Because this Decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action taken in this case, it must be made publicly accessible and will be posted on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, and/or at https://www.govinfo.gov/app/collection/uscourts/national/cofc, in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2018) (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 inf ormation, 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 f rom 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 ref erences to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa (2018). Petitioner has now filed a motion for attorney’s fees and costs, requesting an award of $29,450.10 (representing $27,612.60 in fees plus $1,837.50 in costs). Petitioner’s Application for Fees and Costs (“Motion”) filed Sept. 24, 2023, ECF No. 49. In accordance with General Order No. 9, Petitioner filed a signed statement representing that Petitioner incurred $6.85 in out-of-pocket expenses. Id. at 2. Respondent reacted to the motion on Sept. 26, 2023, reporting that he is satisfied that the statutory requirements for an award of attorney’s fees and costs are met in this case, but deferring resolution of the amount to be awarded to my discretion. Respondent’s Response to Motion at 2-3, ECF No. 50. Petitioner filed a reply on Sept. 28, 2023, reiterating her fees request. ECF No. 51. I have reviewed the billing records submitted with Petitioner’s request. In my experience, the request appears reasonable, and I find no cause to reduce the requested hours or rates. Furthermore, Petitioner has provided supporting documentation for all claimed costs. ECF No. 49-2. Respondent offered no specific objection to the rates or amounts sought. The Vaccine Act permits an award of reasonable attorney’s fees and costs for successful claimants. Section 15(e). Accordingly, I hereby GRANT Petitioner’s Motion for attorney’s fees and costs. Accordingly, Petitioner is awarded the total amount of $29,456.95 3 as follows: • A lump sum of $29,450.10, representing reimbursement for fees and costs, in the form of a check payable jointly to Petitioner and Petitioner’s counsel and; • A lump sum of $6.85, representing reimbursement for Petitioner’s costs, in the form of a check payable to Petitioner. In the absence of a timely-filed motion for review (see Appendix B to the Rules of the Court), the Clerk of Court shall enter judgment in accordance with this Decision. 4 3 This amount is intended to cover all legal expenses incurred in this matter. This award encompasses all charges by the attorney against a client, “advanced costs” as well as f ees f or legal services rendered. Furthermore, § 15(e)(3) prevents an attorney from charging or collecting fees (including costs) that would be in addition to the amount awarded herein. See generally Beck v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 924 F.2d 1029 (Fed. Cir.1991). 4 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties may expedite entry of judgment by f iling a joint notice renouncing their right to seek review. 2 IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Brian H. Corcoran Brian H. Corcoran Chief Special Master 3