VICP Registry Case Source Bundle Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_22-vv-00498 Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_22-vv-00498 Petitioner: Ann Smith Filed: 2023-09-26 Decided: 2023-11-02 Vaccine: Tdap Vaccination date: 2019-08-06 Condition: Guillain-Barré syndrome Outcome: compensated Award amount USD: 135000 AI-assisted case summary: Ann Smith filed a petition on September 26, 2023, seeking compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. Ms. Smith alleged that she suffered from Guillain-Barré syndrome as a result of a Tdap vaccination she received on August 6, 2019. The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, denied that the Tdap vaccine caused Ms. Smith's Guillain-Barré syndrome or any other injury, and denied that the vaccine significantly aggravated a pre-existing condition. Despite maintaining these positions, both parties agreed to settle the case through a joint stipulation filed on September 26, 2023. Special Master Katherine E. Oler reviewed the file and adopted the parties' stipulation as the decision. The stipulation awarded Ann Smith a lump sum of $135,000.00 as compensation for all damages. The decision directs that judgment be entered accordingly. The public decision does not describe the specific onset of symptoms, clinical details, diagnostic tests, treatments, or expert witnesses involved in this case. Petitioner was represented by Jessica Olins of Maglio Christopher & Toale, and Respondent was represented by Dorian Hurley of the U.S. Department of Justice. Theory of causation field: Petitioner Ann Smith alleged Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) following a Tdap vaccination on August 6, 2019. Respondent denied causation. The parties reached a settlement via joint stipulation, which was adopted by Special Master Katherine E. Oler. The stipulation awarded Petitioner $135,000.00 for all damages. The theory of causation was identified as 'Off-Table' in the provided data, and the public decision does not detail the specific medical or scientific basis for the claim or the settlement. Petitioner counsel was Jessica Olins, and Respondent counsel was Dorian Hurley. The decision date was November 2, 2023. Public staged source text: ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_22-vv-00498-0 Date issued/filed: 2023-11-02 Pages: 9 Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 9/26/2023) regarding 36 DECISION of Special Master - Stipulation. Signed by Special Master Katherine E. Oler. (emh) Service on parties made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:22-vv-00498-UNJ Document 40 Filed 11/02/23 Page 1 of 9 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 22-498V (not to be published) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ANN SMITH, * * Filed: September 26, 2023 Petitioner, * * * v. * * SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND * HUMAN SERVICES, * * * Respondent. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Jessica Olins, Maglio Christopher & Toale, Seattle, WA, for Petitioner Dorian Hurley, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1 On May 5, 2022, Ann Smith (“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 Guillain-Barré syndrome as a result of the tetanus, diphtheria, and acellular pertussis (“Tdap”) vaccination she received on August 6, 2019. See Stipulation ¶ 2, 4, dated September 26, 2023 (ECF No. 35); see also Petition. Respondent denies “that petitioner’s alleged GBS or its residual effects were cause[d]-in- 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 1:22-vv-00498-UNJ Document 40 Filed 11/02/23 Page 2 of 9 fact by the Tdap vaccine; and denies that the Tdap vaccine caused petitioner any other injury or petitioner’s current condition, or that the vaccine significantly aggravated a pre-existing injury.” See Stipulation ¶ 6. Nonetheless, both parties, while maintaining their above-stated positions, agreed in a stipulation filed on September 26, 2023, 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 $135,000.00 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 1:22-vv-00498-UNJ Document 40 Filed 11/02/23 Page 3 of 9 Case 1:22-vv-00498-UNJ Document 40 Filed 11/02/23 Page 4 of 9 Case 1:22-vv-00498-UNJ Document 40 Filed 11/02/23 Page 5 of 9 Case 1:22-vv-00498-UNJ Document 40 Filed 11/02/23 Page 6 of 9 Case 1:22-vv-00498-UNJ Document 40 Filed 11/02/23 Page 7 of 9 Case 1:22-vv-00498-UNJ Document 40 Filed 11/02/23 Page 8 of 9 Case 1:22-vv-00498-UNJ Document 40 Filed 11/02/23 Page 9 of 9