VICP Registry Case Source Bundle Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_20-vv-01777 Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_20-vv-01777 Petitioner: Lea Ayotte Filed: 2020-12-07 Decided: 2023-03-03 Vaccine: Tdap Vaccination date: 2019-10-25 Condition: shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) Outcome: compensated Award amount USD: 45403 AI-assisted case summary: Lea Ayotte filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, alleging that she suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) after receiving a tetanus diphtheria acellular Pertussis (Tdap) vaccination on October 25, 2019. The petition stated that the injury lasted for more than six months. The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, filed a Rule 4(c) report conceding that Ms. Ayotte was entitled to compensation. The respondent determined that she had no prior history of shoulder issues, that her pain and reduced range of motion began within 48 hours of the vaccination, and that these symptoms were limited to the injection shoulder. The respondent also agreed that the case was timely filed, the vaccine was administered in the U.S., and the injury met the severity requirement. Based on the respondent's concession and the evidence, a ruling on entitlement was issued, finding Ms. Ayotte entitled to compensation. Subsequently, the parties submitted a proffer on the award of compensation. The respondent proposed an award of $45,402.98, which included $45,000.00 for pain and suffering and $402.98 for past unreimbursable expenses. Ms. Ayotte agreed with this proposed award. The Chief Special Master issued a decision awarding Ms. Ayotte the stipulated amount of $45,402.98 as a lump sum payment. Theory of causation field: Table Public staged source text: ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_20-vv-01777-0 Date issued/filed: 2022-12-14 Pages: 2 Docket text: PUBLIC ORDER/RULING (Originally filed: 11/08/2022) regarding 24 Ruling on Entitlement, Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. (kp) Service on parties made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:20-vv-01777-UNJ Document 26 Filed 12/14/22 Page 1 of 2 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 20-1777V UNPUBLISHED LEA AYOTTE, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: November 8, 2022 v. Special Processing Unit (SPU); SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND Ruling on Entitlement; Concession; HUMAN SERVICES, Table Injury; Tetanus Diphtheria acellular Pertussis (Tdap) Vaccine; Respondent. Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA) Leah VaSahnja Durant, Law Offices of Leah V. Durant, PLLC, Washington, DC, for Petitioner. Mary Eileen Holmes, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1 On December 7, 2020, Lea Ayotte 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), resulting from adverse effects of a tetanus diphtheria acellular Pertussis (Tdap) vaccination she received on October 25, 2019. Petition at 1. Petitioner further alleges that the vaccination was administered within the United States, her injury lasted for more than six months, and that neither she, nor any other party, as ever received compensation in the form of an award or settlement for her vaccine-related 1 Because this unpublished Ruling 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 Ruling 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-01777-UNJ Document 26 Filed 12/14/22 Page 2 of 2 injury. Petition at 1-2. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters. On October 28, 2022, Respondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he concedes that Petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report at 1. Specifically, Respondent determined that “[P]etitioner had no history of pain, inflammation or dysfunction of the affected shoulder prior to intramuscular vaccine administration that would explain the alleged signs, symptoms, examination findings, and/or diagnostic studies occurring after vaccine injection; she more likely than not suffered the onset of pain within forty-eight hours of vaccine administration; her pain and reduced range of motion were limited to the shoulder in which the intramuscular vaccine was administered; and there is no other condition or abnormality present that would explain petitioner’s symptoms.” Id. at 6. Respondent further agrees that “the case was timely filed, that the vaccine was received in the United States, and that petitioner satisfies the statutory severity requirement by suffering the residual effects or complications of her injury for more than six months after vaccine administration.” Id. In view of Respondent’s position and the evidence of record, I find that Petitioner is entitled to compensation. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Brian H. Corcoran Brian H. Corcoran Chief Special Master 2 ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 2: USCOURTS-cofc-1_20-vv-01777-1 Date issued/filed: 2023-03-03 Pages: 5 Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 01/31/2023) regarding 32 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer ( Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. )(mpj) Service on parties made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:20-vv-01777-UNJ Document 36 Filed 03/03/23 Page 1 of 5 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 20-1777V UNPUBLISHED LEA AYOTTE, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: January 31, 2023 v. Special Processing Unit (SPU); SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND Damages Decision Based on Proffer; HUMAN SERVICES, Tetanus Diphtheria acellular Pertussis (Tdap) Vaccine; Shoulder Respondent. Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA) Leah VaSahnja Durant, Law Offices of Leah V. Durant, PLLC, Washington, DC, for Petitioner. Mary Eileen Holmes, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1 On December 7, 2020, Lea Ayotte 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) resulting from adverse effects of a tetanus vaccination she received on or about October 25, 2019. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters. On November 8, 2022, a ruling on entitlement was issued, finding Petitioner entitled to compensation for SIRVA. On January 31, 2023, Respondent filed a proffer on award of compensation (“Proffer”) indicating Petitioner should be awarded $45,402.98, 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-01777-UNJ Document 36 Filed 03/03/23 Page 2 of 5 including $45,000.00 in pain and suffering and $402.98 for past unreimbursable expenses. Proffer at 1-2. In the Proffer, Respondent represented that Petitioner agrees with the proffered award. Id. Based on the record as a whole, I find that Petitioner is entitled to an award as stated in the Proffer. Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Proffer, I award Petitioner a lump sum payment of $45,402.98, including 45,000.00 in pain and suffering and $402.98 for past unreimbursable expenses in the form of a check payable to Petitioner. This amount represents compensation for all damages that would be available under Section 15(a). 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-01777-UNJ Document 36 Filed 03/03/23 Page 3 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS ) LEA AYOTTE, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) No. 20-1777V v. ) Chief Special Master Corcoran ) ECF SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN ) SERVICES, ) ) Respondent. ) ) RESPONDENT’S PROFFER ON AWARD OF COMPENSATION On December 7, 2020, Lea Ayotte (“petitioner”) filed a petition for compensation under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 to -34 (“Vaccine Act” or “Act”), alleging that she suffered a Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (“SIRVA”), as defined in the Vaccine Injury Table, following administration of a tetanus, diphtheria, and acellular pertussis (“Tdap”) vaccination on October 25, 2019. Petition at 1. On October 28, 2022, the Secretary of Health and Human Services (“respondent”) filed a Rule 4(c) Report indicating that this case is appropriate for compensation under the terms of the Act for a SIRVA Table injury, and on November 8, 2022, the Chief Special Master issued a Ruling on Entitlement finding petitioner entitled to compensation. ECF No. 23; ECF No. 24. I. Items of Compensation A. Pain and Suffering Respondent proffers that petitioner should be awarded $45,000.00 in pain and suffering. See 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a)(4). Petitioner agrees. Case 1:20-vv-01777-UNJ Document 36 Filed 03/03/23 Page 4 of 5 B. Past Unreimbursable Expenses Evidence supplied by petitioner documents that she incurred past unreimbursable expenses related to her vaccine-related injury. Respondent proffers that petitioner should be awarded past unreimbursable expenses in the amount of $402.98. See 42 U.S.C. § 300aa- 15(a)(1)(B). Petitioner agrees. These amounts represent all elements of compensation to which petitioner is entitled under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). Petitioner agrees. II. Form of the Award Petitioner is a competent adult. Evidence of guardianship is not required in this case. Respondent recommends that the compensation provided to petitioner should be made through a lump sum payment as described below and requests that the Chief Special Master’s decision and the Court’s judgment award the following1: a lump sum payment of $45,402.98, in the form of a check payable to petitioner. III. Summary of Recommended Payments Following Judgment Lump sum payable to petitioner, Lea Ayotte: $45,402.98. Respectfully submitted, BRIAN M. BOYNTON Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General C. SALVATORE D’ALESSIO Director Torts Branch, Civil Division HEATHER L. PEARLMAN Deputy Director Torts Branch, Civil Division 1 Should petitioner die prior to entry of judgment, the parties reserve the right to move the Court for appropriate relief. In particular, respondent would oppose any award for future lost earnings and future pain and suffering. 2 Case 1:20-vv-01777-UNJ Document 36 Filed 03/03/23 Page 5 of 5 TRACI R. PATTON Assistant Director Torts Branch, Civil Division /s/Mary E. Holmes MARY E. HOLMES Trial Attorney Torts Branch, Civil Division U. S. Department of Justice P.O. Box l46, Benjamin Franklin Station Washington, D.C. 20044-0146 Tel: (202) 616-5022 Mary.E.Holmes@usdoj.gov DATED: January 31, 2023 3 ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 3: USCOURTS-cofc-1_20-vv-01777-cl-extra-10737014 Date issued/filed: 2023-11-17 Pages: 1 Docket text: Supplementary opinion from CourtListener cluster 10270424 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 20-1777V LEA AYOTTE, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, v. Filed: October 10, 2023 SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Leah VaSahnja Durant, Law Offices of Leah V. Durant, PLLC, Washington, DC, for Petitioner. Mary Eileen Holmes, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION ON ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS 1 On December 7, 2020, Lea Ayotte 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 resulting from adverse effects of a tetanus vaccination she received on or about October 25, 2019. Petition, ECF No. 1. On January 31, 2023, I issued a decision awarding compensation to Petitioner based on the Respondent’s proffer. ECF No. 32. 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 $24,919.21 (representing $ 22,970.40 in attorney’s fees and $ 1,948.81 in attorney’s costs). Petitioner’s Application for Attorney’s Fees and Costs (“Motion”) filed Aug. 2, 2023, ECF No. 37. In accordance with General Order No. 9, Petitioner filed a signed statement indicating that Petitioner incurred no out-of-pocket expenses. Id. at 2. Respondent reacted to the motion on Aug. 16, 2023, indicating 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. 38. On Aug. 17, 2023, Petitioner filed a reply requesting an award of fees and costs as indicated in Petitioner’s motion. ECF No. 39. 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. 37-2. 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. I award a total of $24,919.21 (representing $22,970.40 in attorney’s fees and $ 1,948.81 in attorney’s costs) as a lump sum in the form of a check jointly payable to Petitioner and Petitioner’s counsel, Leah V. Durant. 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. 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Brian H. Corcoran Brian H. Corcoran Chief Special Master 3 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