VICP Registry Case Source Bundle Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_21-vv-02279 Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_21-vv-02279 Petitioner: Alberto Abraham Filed: 2021-12-10 Decided: 2023-08-03 Vaccine: varicella Vaccination date: 2020-07-27 Condition: disseminated varicella vaccine strain viral disease Outcome: compensated Award amount USD: 65000 AI-assisted case summary: Alberto Abraham filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program on December 10, 2021. He alleged that he suffered disseminated varicella vaccine strain viral disease following receipt of a varicella vaccine on July 27, 2020. Mr. Abraham claimed this was a defined Table injury and that he met the program's requirements for compensation. He further alleged that he received the vaccine in the United States, suffered residual effects for more than six months, and had not filed a civil action or received compensation for his condition. The respondent denied that Mr. Abraham sustained the alleged injury, denied that the varicella vaccine caused his alleged injury or any other injury, and denied that his current condition was a sequela of a vaccine-related injury. Despite the respondent's denials, the parties filed a joint stipulation on July 3, 2023, agreeing that compensation should be awarded. Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran found the stipulation reasonable and adopted it as the decision of the court. Pursuant to the stipulation, Mr. Abraham was awarded a lump sum of $65,000.00, payable to him, as compensation for all items of damages. The decision does not describe the onset of symptoms, specific clinical details, diagnostic tests, treatments, or the mechanism of injury. Petitioner was represented by Jonathan Joseph Svitak of Shannon Law Group, P.C., and Respondent was represented by Zoe Wade of the U.S. Department of Justice. Theory of causation field: Petitioner Alberto Abraham alleged that he suffered disseminated varicella vaccine strain viral disease, a defined Table injury, following a varicella vaccine received on July 27, 2020. Respondent denied the alleged injury and causation. The parties filed a joint stipulation agreeing to an award. The Special Master adopted the stipulation. Petitioner was awarded $65,000.00. The public decision does not detail the specific theory of causation, medical experts, or the mechanism of injury, other than stating it was a Table injury. Public staged source text: ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_21-vv-02279-0 Date issued/filed: 2023-08-03 Pages: 7 Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 07/03/2023) regarding 32 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer (Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. )(mpj) Service on parties made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:21-vv-02279-UNJ Document 35 Filed 08/03/23 Page 1 of 7 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 21-2279V ALBERTO ABRAHAM, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: July 3, 2023 v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Jonathan Joseph Svitak, Shannon Law Group, P.C., Woodridge, IL, for Petitioner. Zoe Wade, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1 On December 10, 2021, Alberto Abraham 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 disseminated varicella vaccine strain viral disease, a defined Table injury, following the receipt of a varicella vaccine on July 27, 2020. Petition at 1, ¶¶ 2, 11-13; Stipulation, filed at July 3, 2023, ¶¶ 1-2, 4. Petitioner further alleges that he received the vaccine within the United States, that he suffered the residual effects of his condition for more than six months, and that neither he nor any other party has filed a civil action or received compensation for his condition. Petition at ¶¶ 2, 11, 14-15; Stipulation at ¶¶ 3-5. Respondent denies that [P]etitioner sustained disseminated varicella vaccine-strain viral disease; denies that the varicella vaccine caused [P]etitioner’s alleged 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 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 (2018). Case 1:21-vv-02279-UNJ Document 35 Filed 08/03/23 Page 2 of 7 Nevertheless, on July 3, 2023, 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 $65,000.00 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-02279-UNJ Document 35 Filed 08/03/23 Page 3 of 7 Case 1:21-vv-02279-UNJ Document 35 Filed 08/03/23 Page 4 of 7 Case 1:21-vv-02279-UNJ Document 35 Filed 08/03/23 Page 5 of 7 Case 1:21-vv-02279-UNJ Document 35 Filed 08/03/23 Page 6 of 7 Case 1:21-vv-02279-UNJ Document 35 Filed 08/03/23 Page 7 of 7