VICP Registry Case Source Bundle Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_20-vv-01615 Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_20-vv-01615 Petitioner: Raena Todd Filed: 2020-11-18 Decided: 2023-01-23 Vaccine: influenza Vaccination date: 2018-10-15 Condition: shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) Outcome: compensated Award amount USD: 20269 AI-assisted case summary: On November 18, 2020, Raena Todd filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, alleging she suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) after receiving an influenza vaccine on October 15, 2018. Ms. Todd stated that she received the vaccine in the United States and experienced residual effects for more than six months. She also affirmed that neither she nor any other party had filed a civil action or received a prior award for this injury. The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, denied that Petitioner sustained a SIRVA Table injury or that the vaccine caused her alleged shoulder injury. Despite these denials, on December 22, 2022, the parties filed a joint stipulation agreeing that compensation should be awarded. Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran reviewed the stipulation, found it reasonable, and adopted it as the court's decision. Raena Todd was awarded a lump sum of $20,269.59, payable by check to Petitioner, as compensation for all items of damages available under Section 15(a) of the Vaccine Act. The decision was issued on January 23, 2023. Theory of causation field: Petitioner Raena Todd filed a petition on November 18, 2020, alleging a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) following an influenza vaccine on October 15, 2018. The respondent denied the alleged SIRVA Table injury and causation. The parties subsequently filed a joint stipulation on December 22, 2022, agreeing to an award of compensation. Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran found the stipulation reasonable and adopted it as the decision. Petitioner was awarded $20,269.59 as compensation for all damages under Section 15(a) of the Vaccine Act. The public decision does not describe the specific mechanism of injury, onset, symptoms, diagnostic tests, treatments, or expert witnesses. The theory of causation relied upon was a Table injury, as indicated by the condition raw field and the stipulation. Public staged source text: ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_20-vv-01615-0 Date issued/filed: 2023-01-23 Pages: 7 Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 12/22/2022) regarding 37 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer ( Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. )(mpj) Service on parties made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:20-vv-01615-UNJ Document 41 Filed 01/23/23 Page 1 of 7 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 20-1615V UNPUBLISHED RAENA TODD, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: December 22, 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) Ronald Craig Homer, Conway, Homer, P.C., Boston, MA, for Petitioner. Zoe Wade, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1 On November 18, 2020, Raena Todd 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”), a defined Table injury, after receiving an influenza (“flu”) vaccine on October 15, 2018. Petition at 1, ¶ 2; Stipulation, filed at December 22, 2022, ¶¶ 1-2, 4. Petitioner further alleges that she received the vaccine within 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 alleged SIRVA injury. Petition at ¶¶ 13-15; 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 her 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 1:20-vv-01615-UNJ Document 41 Filed 01/23/23 Page 2 of 7 Nevertheless, on December 22, 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 $20,269.59 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-01615-UNJ Document 41 Filed 01/23/23 Page 3 of 7 Case 1:20-vv-01615-UNJ Document 41 Filed 01/23/23 Page 4 of 7 Case 1:20-vv-01615-UNJ Document 41 Filed 01/23/23 Page 5 of 7 Case 1:20-vv-01615-UNJ Document 41 Filed 01/23/23 Page 6 of 7 Case 1:20-vv-01615-UNJ Document 41 Filed 01/23/23 Page 7 of 7