VICP Registry Case Source Bundle Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_20-vv-02025 Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_20-vv-02025 Petitioner: Andrea Navis Filed: 2020-12-29 Decided: 2023-07-28 Vaccine: influenza Vaccination date: 2018-10-11 Condition: left shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) Outcome: compensated Award amount USD: 90000 AI-assisted case summary: Andrea Navis filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program on December 29, 2020. She alleged that she suffered a left shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) after receiving an influenza vaccine on October 11, 2018. The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, filed a Rule 4(c) report on April 12, 2023, conceding that Ms. Navis was entitled to compensation. The respondent believed that the petitioner had satisfied the criteria for SIRVA as a Table injury. On April 17, 2023, Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran issued a ruling on entitlement, finding Ms. Navis eligible for compensation. Subsequently, on June 26, 2023, the respondent filed a proffer on award of compensation. In this proffer, the respondent recommended an award of $90,000.00 for pain and suffering, representing all damages available under the Act. Ms. Navis agreed to this proffered award. On July 28, 2023, Chief Special Master Corcoran issued a decision awarding Ms. Navis a lump sum payment of $90,000.00, payable by check to the petitioner. The decision noted that the case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit and that the ruling was unpublished but would be posted on the court's website in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002. Petitioner was represented by Edward M. Kraus of Kraus Law Group, LLC, and respondent was represented by Nina Ren of the U.S. Department of Justice. The public decision does not describe the specific onset of symptoms, medical tests, or treatments. The theory of causation is based on SIRVA being a defined Table injury. Theory of causation field: Petitioner Andrea Navis alleged a Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA) following an influenza vaccine on October 11, 2018. Respondent conceded that SIRVA is a Table injury and that Petitioner met the criteria for entitlement. The case was ruled on entitlement on April 17, 2023, by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. A stipulation for award was filed on June 26, 2023, by Respondent Nina Ren, agreeing to a $90,000.00 award for pain and suffering, which Petitioner Andrea Navis accepted. Chief Special Master Corcoran issued a decision on July 28, 2023, awarding the lump sum of $90,000.00. The public text does not detail the specific mechanism of injury, medical experts, or diagnostic tests. Public staged source text: ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_20-vv-02025-0 Date issued/filed: 2023-05-22 Pages: 2 Docket text: PUBLIC ORDER/RULING (Originally filed: 04/17/2023) regarding 39 Ruling on Entitlement. Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. (kle) Service on parties made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:20-vv-02025-UNJ Document 42 Filed 05/22/23 Page 1 of 2 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 20-2025V UNPUBLISHED ANDREA NAVIS, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: April 17, 2023 v. Special Processing Unit (SPU); SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND Ruling on Entitlement; Concession; HUMAN SERVICES, Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine; Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Respondent. Administration (SIRVA) Edward M. Kraus, Kraus Law Group, LLC, Chicago, IL, for Petitioner. Nina Ren, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1 On December 29, 2020, Andrea Navis 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 left shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”), a defined Table injury, after receiving the influenza vaccine on October 11, 2018. Petition at 1, ¶ 2. 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 compensation for his injury. Id. at ¶¶ 2, 16-17. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters. 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-02025-UNJ Document 42 Filed 05/22/23 Page 2 of 2 On April 12, 2023, 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 believes “[P]etitioner has satisfied the criteria set forth in the Vaccine Injury Table and Qualifications and Aids to Interpretation for SIRVA.” Id. at 5. 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-02025-1 Date issued/filed: 2023-07-28 Pages: 4 Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 06/26/2023) regarding 44 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. (nh) Service on parties made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:20-vv-02025-UNJ Document 48 Filed 07/28/23 Page 1 of 4 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 20-2025V ANDREA NAVIS, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: June 26, 2023 v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Edward M. Kraus, Kraus Law Group, LLC, Chicago, IL, for Petitioner. Nina Ren, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1 On December 29, 2020, Andrea Navis 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 left shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”), a defined Table injury, after receiving the influenza vaccine on October 11, 2018. Petition at 1, ¶ 2. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters. On April 17, 2023, a ruling on entitlement was issued, finding Petitioner entitled to compensation for her SIRVA. On June 26, 2023, Respondent filed a proffer on award of compensation (“Proffer”) indicating Petitioner should be awarded $90,000.00 for her pain and suffering. Proffer at 1. In the Proffer, Respondent represented that Petitioner agrees 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-02025-UNJ Document 48 Filed 07/28/23 Page 2 of 4 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 $90,000.00 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-02025-UNJ Document 48 Filed 07/28/23 Page 3 of 4 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS ANDREA NAVIS, Petitioner, v. No. 20-2025V Chief Special Master Corcoran SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND ECF HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. RESPONDENT’S PROFFER ON AWARD OF COMPENSATION On December 29, 2020, Andrea Navis (“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”), alleging that she suffered a Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (“SIRVA”), as defined in the Vaccine Injury Table, following administration of an influenza vaccine she received on October 11, 2018. Petition at 1. On April 12, 2023, 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 April 17, 2023, the Chief Special Master issued a Ruling on Entitlement finding petitioner entitled to compensation. ECF No. 37; ECF No. 39. I. Item of Compensation Based on the evidence of record, respondent proffers that petitioner should be awarded $90,000.00 for pain and suffering. See 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a)(4). Petitioner agrees. This amount represents all elements of compensation to which petitioner is entitled under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). Petitioner agrees. Case 1:20-vv-02025-UNJ Document 48 Filed 07/28/23 Page 4 of 4 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 $90,000.00, in the form of a check payable to petitioner. 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 ALEXIS B. BABCOCK Assistant Director Torts Branch, Civil Division /s/ NINA Y. REN NINA Y. REN Trial Attorney Torts Branch, Civil Division U.S. Department of Justice P.O. Box 146 Benjamin Franklin Station Washington D.C. 20044-0146 (202) 451-7499 Nina.Ren@usdoj.gov DATED: June 26, 2023 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 ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 3: USCOURTS-cofc-1_20-vv-02025-cl-extra-10735915 Date issued/filed: 2024-03-15 Pages: 1 Docket text: Supplementary opinion from CourtListener cluster 10269325 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 20-2025V ANDREA NAVIS, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, v. Filed: February 12, 2024 SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Edward Kraus, Kraus Law Group, LLC, Chicago, IL, for Petitioner. Nina Ren, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION ON ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS 1 On December 29, 2020, Andrea Navis 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 left shoulder injury related to vaccine administration a defined Table injury, after receiving the influenza vaccine on October 11, 2018. Petition, ECF No. 1. On June 26, 2023, I issued a decision awarding compensation to Petitioner based on the Respondent’s proffer. ECF No. 44. 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 $19,220.79 (representing $15,115.50 in fees plus $93.27 in costs incurred by Petitioner’s counsel of record, Edward Kraus and $4,012.02 in fees and costs incurred by Petitioner’s former counsel, Habush Habush & Rottier, S.C). Petitioner’s Application for Fees and Costs (“Motion”) filed Nov. 17, 2023, ECF No. 49. In accordance with General Order No. 9, counsel for Petitioner represents that Petitioner incurred no out-of-pocket expenses. Id. at 1. Respondent reacted to the motion on Nov. 19, 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 did not file a reply thereafter. 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. 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 amount of $19,220.79 as follows: • A lump sum of $15,208.77 (representing $15,115.50 in fees plus $93.27 in costs) in the form of a check jointly payable to Petitioner and Petitioner’s counsel of record: Edward Kraus; and • A lump sum of $4,012.02 (representing $2,985.00 in fees plus $1,027.02 in costs) in the form of a check jointly payable to Petitioner and Petitioner’s former counsel: Habush Habush & Rottier, S.C. 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 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 IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Brian H. Corcoran Brian H. Corcoran Chief Special Master 3