VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_21-vv-01345
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_21-vv-01345
Petitioner: Nardia Thompson Harris
Filed: 2021-12-22
Decided: 2023-02-03
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 2019-10-11
Condition: left median axonal neuropathy
Outcome: compensated
Award amount USD: 50000

AI-assisted case summary:
Nardia Thompson Harris filed a petition on December 22, 2021, seeking compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. She alleged that she suffered from left median axonal neuropathy as a result of an influenza vaccination received on October 11, 2019. The respondent denied that the vaccine caused the petitioner's alleged injuries or any other injury, and denied that her current condition was a sequela of a vaccine-related injury. Despite maintaining these positions, both parties agreed to settle the case through a stipulation filed on December 22, 2022. Special Master Katherine E. Oler reviewed the file and found the stipulation to be reasonable, adopting it as the court's decision. The stipulation awarded Nardia Thompson Harris a lump sum of $50,000.00, payable by check to the petitioner, as compensation for all damages. The decision was filed on February 3, 2023. The public decision does not describe the specific onset of symptoms, medical tests, treatments, or expert witnesses involved in this case. Petitioner was represented by Laura Levenberg of Muller Brazil PA, and respondent was represented by Madelyn Weeks of the U.S. Department of Justice.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioner Nardia Thompson Harris alleged left median axonal neuropathy as a result of an influenza vaccination received on October 11, 2019. Respondent denied causation. The parties reached a settlement via stipulation, filed December 22, 2022, agreeing to an award without admitting or denying causation. Special Master Katherine E. Oler adopted the stipulation as her decision on February 3, 2023. The stipulation awarded a lump sum of $50,000.00 to the petitioner. The public decision does not detail the specific theory of causation, medical experts, or the mechanism of injury. Petitioner's counsel was Laura Levenberg, and respondent's counsel was Madelyn Weeks.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_21-vv-01345-0
Date issued/filed: 2023-02-03
Pages: 7
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 12/22/2022) regarding 26 DECISION of Special Master - Stipulation. Signed by Special Master Katherine E. Oler. (emh) Service on parties made.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:21-vv-01345-UNJ Document 31 Filed 02/03/23 Page 1 of 7
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 21-1345V
(not to be published)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*
*
NARDIA THOMPSON HARRIS,
*
* Filed: December 22, 2022
Petitioner, *
*
*
v. * Decision by Stipulation; Damages;
* Influenza (“Flu”) Vaccine; Left Median
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND * Axonal Neuropathy.
HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
*
Respondent. *
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Laura Levenberg, Muller Brazil PA, Dresher, PA, for Petitioner
Madelyn Weeks, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent
DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1
On May 12, 2021, Nardia Thompson Harris (“Petitioner”) filed a petition, seeking
compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (“the Vaccine
Program”).2 Pet., ECF No. 1. Petitioner alleges she suffered from an injury of left median axonal
neuropathy as a result of the influenza (“flu”) vaccination she received on October 11, 2019. See
Stipulation ¶ 2, 4, dated December 22, 2022 (ECF No. 25); see also Petition.
Respondent denies “that the vaccine caused petitioner’s alleged injuries or any other injury;
1 Although this Decision has been formally designated “not to be published,” it will nevertheless be posted
on the Court of Federal Claims’ website in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002, 44 U.S.C. §
3501 (2012). This means the Decision will be available to anyone with access to the internet. As
provided by 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-12(d)(4)(B), however, the parties may object to the Decision’s inclusion of
certain kinds of confidential information. Specifically, under Vaccine Rule 18(b), each party has fourteen
days within which to request redaction “of any information furnished by that party: (1) that is a trade secret
or commercial or financial in substance and is privileged or confidential; or (2) that includes medical files
or similar files, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy.”
Vaccine Rule 18(b). Otherwise, the Decision in its present form will be available. Id.
2 The Vaccine Program comprises Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L.
No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755 (codified as amended at 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-10–34 (2012)) (hereinafter
“Vaccine Act” or “the Act”). All subsequent references to sections of the Vaccine Act shall be to the
pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa.

Case 1:21-vv-01345-UNJ Document 31 Filed 02/03/23 Page 2 of 7
and denies that her current condition is a sequela of a vaccine-related injury.” See Stipulation ¶ 6.
Nonetheless, both parties, while maintaining their above-stated positions, agreed in a stipulation
filed December 22, 2022 that the issues before them can be settled and that a decision should be
entered awarding Petitioner compensation.
I have reviewed the file, and based upon that review, I conclude that the parties’ stipulation
is reasonable. I therefore adopt it as my decision in awarding damages on the terms set forth
therein.
The stipulation awards:
A lump sum of $50,000.00 in the form of a check payable to petitioner.
Stipulation ¶ 8. This award represents compensation for all damages that would be available under
42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a).
I approve a Vaccine Program award in the requested amount set forth above to be made to
Petitioner. In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the Clerk of
the Court is directed to enter judgment herewith.3
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/ Katherine E. Oler
Katherine E. Oler
Special Master
3 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties may expedite entry of judgment by jointly filing notice
renouncing their right to seek review.

Case 1:21-vv-01345-UNJ Document 31 Filed 02/03/23 Page 3 of 7

Case 1:21-vv-01345-UNJ Document 31 Filed 02/03/23 Page 4 of 7

Case 1:21-vv-01345-UNJ Document 31 Filed 02/03/23 Page 5 of 7

Case 1:21-vv-01345-UNJ Document 31 Filed 02/03/23 Page 6 of 7

Case 1:21-vv-01345-UNJ Document 31 Filed 02/03/23 Page 7 of 7