VICP Registry Case Source Bundle Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_20-vv-01380 Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_20-vv-01380 Petitioner: Sandra Ruiz Filed: 2020-10-13 Decided: 2023-08-01 Vaccine: influenza Vaccination date: 2018-09-22 Condition: left shoulder pain, brachial neuritis, Parsonage-Turner syndrome Outcome: compensated Award amount USD: 7500 AI-assisted case summary: Sandra Ruiz filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program on October 13, 2020. Petitioner alleged that she received an influenza vaccine on or about September 22, 2018, and subsequently suffered from left shoulder pain, brachial neuritis, and Parsonage-Turner syndrome, experiencing residual effects for more than six months. The influenza vaccine is listed on the Vaccine Injury Table. The respondent denied that the flu vaccine caused Petitioner's alleged injuries or current condition. On August 1, 2023, the parties filed a joint stipulation agreeing to a resolution of the case. Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran found the stipulation reasonable and adopted it as the decision. Pursuant to the stipulation, Ms. Ruiz was awarded a lump sum of $7,500.00, payable by check to Petitioner, as compensation for all items of damages available under Section 15(a) of the Vaccine Act. The public decision does not describe the specific onset of symptoms, medical tests performed, treatments received, or the names of any medical experts consulted by either party. Petitioner was represented by Neal Fialkow, and Respondent was represented by Austin Joel Egan. Theory of causation field: Petitioner Sandra Ruiz received an influenza vaccine on or about September 22, 2018. She alleged that this vaccine caused left shoulder pain, brachial neuritis, and Parsonage-Turner syndrome, with residual effects lasting over six months. The influenza vaccine is listed on the Vaccine Injury Table. Respondent denied causation. The parties filed a joint stipulation on August 1, 2023, agreeing to a resolution. Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran adopted the stipulation, awarding Petitioner $7,500.00 as compensation for all damages under Section 15(a). The public decision does not detail the specific mechanism of injury, expert testimony, or the evidence considered beyond the stipulation. Petitioner's counsel was Neal Fialkow, and Respondent's counsel was Austin Joel Egan. Public staged source text: ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_20-vv-01380-0 Date issued/filed: 2023-09-01 Pages: 7 Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 08/01/2023) regarding 59 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer ( Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. )(mpj) Service on parties made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:20-vv-01380-UNJ Document 61 Filed 09/01/23 Page 1 of 7 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 20-1380V SANDRA RUIZ, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, v. Filed: August 1, 2023 SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Neal Fialkow, Neal Fialkow Esq., Pasadena, CA, for Petitioner. Austin Joel Egan, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1 On October 13, 2020, Sandra Ruiz 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 received an influenza (“flu”) vaccine, which vaccine is contained in the Vaccine Injury Table (the “Table”), 42 C.F.R. § 100.3(a), on or about September 22, 2018. Petitioner alleges that she suffered left shoulder pain, brachial neuritis, Parsonage-Turner syndrome, and other symptoms and conditions as a result of receiving the flu vaccine. Petitioner further alleges that she experienced the residual effects of this alleged injury for more than six months. Respondent denies that Petitioner suffered from left shoulder pain, brachial neuritis, Parsonage-Turner syndrome, or other symptoms and conditions as a result of the flu vaccine, and denies that the flu vaccine caused her any other injury or her current condition. 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 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-01380-UNJ Document 61 Filed 09/01/23 Page 2 of 7 Nevertheless, on August 1, 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. Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Stipulation, I award the following compensation: A lump sum of $7,500.00 in the form of a check payable to Petitioner. This amount represents compensation for all items of damages that would be available under Section 15(a). Stipulation at ¶ 8. 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-01380-UNJ Document 61 Filed 09/01/23 Page 3 of 7 Case 1:20-vv-01380-UNJ Document 61 Filed 09/01/23 Page 4 of 7 Case 1:20-vv-01380-UNJ Document 61 Filed 09/01/23 Page 5 of 7 Case 1:20-vv-01380-UNJ Document 61 Filed 09/01/23 Page 6 of 7 Case 1:20-vv-01380-UNJ Document 61 Filed 09/01/23 Page 7 of 7 ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 2: USCOURTS-cofc-1_20-vv-01380-cl-extra-10735810 Date issued/filed: 2024-03-28 Pages: 1 Docket text: Supplementary opinion from CourtListener cluster 10269220 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 20-1380V SANDRA RUIZ, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, v. Filed: February 23, 2024 SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Neal Fialkow, Neal Fialkow Esq., Pasadena, CA, for Petitioner. Austin Joel Egan, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION ON ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS 1 On October 13, 2020, Sandra Ruiz 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 left shoulder pain, brachial neuritis, Parsonage-Turner syndrome, and other symptoms and conditions as a result of receiving the flu vaccine on September 22, 2018. Petition, ECF No. 1. On August 1, 2023, I issued a decision awarding compensation to Petitioner based on the parties’ stipulation. ECF No. 59. 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 $44,235.90 (representing $43,586.05 in fees plus $649.85 in costs). Petitioner’s Application for Fees and Costs (“Motion”) filed Oct. 5, 2023, ECF No. 62. In accordance with General Order No. 9, Petitioner filed a signed statement representing that Petitioner incurred no out-of-pocket expenses. ECF No. 52. Respondent reacted to the motion on Oct. 24, 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. 63. Petitioner did not file a reply thereafter. ATTORNEY COSTS Petitioner requests $649.85 in overall costs. ECF No. 62 at 14. This amount is comprised of obtaining medical records, postage fees and the Court’s filing fee. I have reviewed the requested costs and find the majority of them to be reasonable, with the exception of $145.37 3 in requested costs that have not been substantiated by any supporting documentation, such as an invoice or proof of payment. When Petitioners fail to provide appropriate documentation to substantiate a requested cost, special masters have refrained from awarding the relevant sum. See, e.g., Gardner-Cook v. Sec’y of Health & Hum. Servs., No. 99-480V, 2005 WL 6122520, at *4 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. June 30, 2005). Thus, I disallow such reimbursement reducing the total amount of litigation costs by $145.37. CONCLUSION 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. I award a total of $44,090.53 (representing $43,586.05 in fees plus $504.48 in costs) as a lump sum in the form of a check jointly payable to Petitioner and Petitioner’s counsel, Neal J. Fialkow. 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 Examples of the unsubstantiated costs: 6/8/21; 6/21/22. ECF No. 62 at 14. 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