VICP Registry Case Source Bundle Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_21-vv-00024 Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_21-vv-00024 Petitioner: Michael Garrison Filed: 2021-01-04 Decided: 2022-12-23 Vaccine: influenza Vaccination date: 2019-10-31 Condition: shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) Outcome: compensated Award amount USD: 82000 AI-assisted case summary: Michael Garrison filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program on January 4, 2021. He alleged that he suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) from an influenza vaccine he received on October 31, 2019. The petition stated that the vaccine was administered in the United States, that Mr. Garrison experienced residual effects of his condition for more than six months, and that there had been no prior award or settlement of a civil action for damages on his behalf. The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, denied that the petitioner sustained a SIRVA Table injury, denied that the vaccine caused the alleged shoulder injury or any other injury, and denied that his current condition was a sequela of a vaccine-related injury. On November 18, 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 decision of the court. Mr. Garrison was awarded $82,000.00 as a lump sum, payable by check to the Petitioner, representing compensation for all items of damages. Petitioner's counsel was Maximillian J. Muller of Muller Brazil, LLP. Respondent's counsel was Sarah Black Rifkin of the U.S. Department of Justice. The decision was issued on December 23, 2022. Theory of causation field: Petitioner Michael Garrison alleged a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) following an influenza vaccine on October 31, 2019. Respondent denied the SIRVA Table injury and causation. The parties filed a joint stipulation on November 18, 2022, agreeing to an award. Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran found the stipulation reasonable and adopted it. An award of $82,000.00 was granted as a lump sum. The public decision does not describe the specific mechanism of injury, expert testimony, or detailed clinical facts beyond the alleged SIRVA and its duration of residual effects. The theory of causation is based on the Vaccine Injury Table (SIRVA). Public staged source text: ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_21-vv-00024-0 Date issued/filed: 2022-12-23 Pages: 7 Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 11/21/2022) regarding 31 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer, ( Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. )(mpj) Service on parties made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:21-vv-00024-UNJ Document 35 Filed 12/23/22 Page 1 of 7 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 21-0024V UNPUBLISHED MICHAEL GARRISON, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: November 21, 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) Maximillian J. Muller, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA, for Petitioner. Sarah Black Rifkin, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1 On January 4, 2021, Michael Garrison 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 he suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) resulting from an influenza vaccine received on October 31, 2019. Petition at 1; Stipulation, filed November 18, 2022, at ¶¶ 2-4. Petitioner further alleges that the vaccine was administered in the United States, he experienced the residual effects of his condition for more than six months, and there has been no prior award or settlement of a civil action for damages on his behalf as a result of his alleged injuries. Petition at ¶¶ 1, 4-6; Stipulation at ¶¶ 3-5. “Respondent denies that petitioner sustained a SIRVA Table injury; denies that the vaccine caused petitioner’s alleged shoulder injury, or any other injury; and denies that his 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 1:21-vv-00024-UNJ Document 35 Filed 12/23/22 Page 2 of 7 Nevertheless, on November 18, 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 $82,000.00 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 1:21-vv-00024-UNJ Document 35 Filed 12/23/22 Page 3 of 7 Case 1:21-vv-00024-UNJ Document 35 Filed 12/23/22 Page 4 of 7 Case 1:21-vv-00024-UNJ Document 35 Filed 12/23/22 Page 5 of 7 Case 1:21-vv-00024-UNJ Document 35 Filed 12/23/22 Page 6 of 7 Case 1:21-vv-00024-UNJ Document 35 Filed 12/23/22 Page 7 of 7