VICP Registry Case Source Bundle Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_22-vv-01025 Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_22-vv-01025 Petitioner: Eric Doenlen Filed: 2022-08-19 Decided: 2024-02-09 Vaccine: influenza Vaccination date: 2021-11-30 Condition: shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) Outcome: compensated Award amount USD: 47500 AI-assisted case summary: Eric Doenlen filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program alleging he suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) following an influenza vaccination on November 30, 2021. He further alleged that his SIRVA injury persisted for longer than six months. The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, filed a Rule 4(c) report conceding that Mr. Doenlen is entitled to compensation. The respondent stated that Mr. Doenlen's injury was consistent with SIRVA as defined by the Vaccine Injury Table, noting he had no prior shoulder issues, the pain occurred within 48 hours of vaccination, was limited to the injection site, and no other condition explained the pain. Based on the respondent's concession and the evidence, the court found Mr. Doenlen entitled to compensation. Subsequently, a decision awarding damages was issued. The respondent's Rule 4(c) Report and Proffer on Damages indicated an award of $47,500.00 for pain and suffering, which Mr. Doenlen agreed to. The court awarded Mr. Doenlen a lump sum payment of $47,500.00 in pain and suffering. Theory of causation field: Table Public staged source text: ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_22-vv-01025-0 Date issued/filed: 2024-02-09 Pages: 2 Docket text: PUBLIC ORDER/RULING (Originally filed: 12/26/2023) regarding 27 Ruling on Entitlement. Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. (kle) Service on parties made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:22-vv-01025-UNJ Document 34 Filed 02/09/24 Page 1 of 2 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 22-1025V ERIC DOENLEN, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: December 26, 2023 v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Jonathan Joseph Svitak, Shannon Law Group, P.C., Woodridge, IL, for Petitioner. Ryan Pohlman Miller, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1 On August 19, 2022, Eric Doenlen 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”) following an influenza vaccination he received on November 30, 2021. Petition at 1. Petitioner further alleges he suffered his SIRVA injury for longer than six months. Petition at ¶20. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters. On December 18, 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. Respondent states that “Petitioner’s alleged injury is consistent with SIRVA 1 Because this Ruling 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 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 (2018). Case 1:22-vv-01025-UNJ Document 34 Filed 02/09/24 Page 2 of 2 as defined by the Vaccine Injury Table. Specifically, Petitioner had no history of pain, inflammation, or dysfunction of his right shoulder prior to vaccination; pain occurred within 48 hours after receipt of an intramuscular vaccination; pain was limited to the shoulder in which the vaccine was administered; and no other condition or abnormality has been identified to explain Petitioner’s shoulder pain.” Id. at 6. Respondent further agrees that “Petitioner has satisfied all legal prerequisites for compensation under the Act.” Id. 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_22-vv-01025-1 Date issued/filed: 2024-02-09 Pages: 2 Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 12/26/2023) regarding 28 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer. Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. (kle) Service on parties made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:22-vv-01025-UNJ Document 35 Filed 02/09/24 Page 1 of 2 CORRECTED In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 22-1025V ERIC DOENLEN, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: December 26, 2023 v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Jonathan Joseph Svitak, Shannon Law Group, P.C., Woodridge, IL, for Petitioner. Ryan Pohlman Miller, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1 On August 19, 2022, Eric Doenlen 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”) following an influenza vaccination he received on November 30, 2021. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters. On December 18, 2023, Respondent filed a Rule 4(c) Report and Proffer on Damages (“Rule 4/Proffer”). ECF No. 25. On December 26, 2023, a ruling on entitlement was issued, finding Petitioner entitled to compensation for his SIRVA. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report/Proffer indicates that Petitioner should be awarded $47.500.00 in pain and suffering. Rule 4(c) Report/Proffer at 7. In the Rule 4(c) Report/Proffer, Respondent represented that Petitioner agrees 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. 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 1:22-vv-01025-UNJ Document 35 Filed 02/09/24 Page 2 of 2 Pursuant to the terms stated Rule 4(c) Report/Proffer, I award Petitioner a lump sum payment of $47,500.00 in pain and suffering 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 ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 3: USCOURTS-cofc-1_22-vv-01025-cl-extra-10736223 Date issued/filed: 2024-02-09 Pages: 1 Docket text: Supplementary opinion from CourtListener cluster 10269633 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CORRECTED In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 22-1025V ERIC DOENLEN, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: December 26, 2023 v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Jonathan Joseph Svitak, Shannon Law Group, P.C., Woodridge, IL, for Petitioner. Ryan Pohlman Miller, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES 1 On August 19, 2022, Eric Doenlen 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”) following an influenza vaccination he received on November 30, 2021. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters. On December 18, 2023, Respondent filed a Rule 4(c) Report and Proffer on Damages (“Rule 4/Proffer”). ECF No. 25. On December 26, 2023, a ruling on entitlement was issued, finding Petitioner entitled to compensation for his SIRVA. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report/Proffer indicates that Petitioner should be awarded $47.500.00 in pain and suffering. Rule 4(c) Report/Proffer at 7. In the Rule 4(c) Report/Proffer, Respondent represented that Petitioner agrees 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. 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). Pursuant to the terms stated Rule 4(c) Report/Proffer, I award Petitioner a lump sum payment of $47,500.00 in pain and suffering 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 ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 4: USCOURTS-cofc-1_22-vv-01025-cl-extra-10735555 Date issued/filed: 2024-04-23 Pages: 1 Docket text: Supplementary opinion from CourtListener cluster 10268965 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 22-1025V ERIC DOENLEN, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, v. Filed: March 15, 2024 SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND Special Processing Unit (SPU); HUMAN SERVICES, Attorney’s Fees and Costs Respondent. Jonathan Joseph Svitak, Shannon Law Group, PC, Woodridge, IL , for Petitioner Ryan Pohlman Miller, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION ON ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS 1 On August 19, 2022, Eric Doenlen 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”) following an influenza vaccination he received on November 30, 2021. Petition at 1. On December 26, 2023, I issued a decision awarding compensation to Petitioner based on the Respondent’s proffer. ECF No. 28. 1Because 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). Petitioner has now filed a motion for attorney’s fees and costs, requesting an award of $31,048.83 (representing $29,987.60 in fees plus $1,061.23 in costs). Petitioner’s Final Motion for Attorney Fees and Cost (“Motion”) filed Dec. 27, 2023, ECF No. 32. In accordance with General Order No. 9, counsel for Petitioner represents that Petitioner incurred no out-of-pocket expenses. Motion at 3. Respondent reacted to the motion on January 7, 2024, indicating 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. 33. Petitioner filed no reply. 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. ECF No. 32-4. 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 of $31,048.83 (representing $29,987.60 in fees plus $1,061.23 in costs) as a lump sum in the form of a check jointly payable to Petitioner and Petitioner’s counsel, Shannon Law Group. 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 IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Brian H. Corcoran Brian H. Corcoran Chief Special Master 3 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties may expedite entry of judgment by filing a joint notice renouncing their right to seek review. 2