United States Court of Federal Claims, 2015

Mejia v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Decided February 2, 2015 · Nora Beth Dorsey

Opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 14-189V Filed: January 12, 2015

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * UNPUBLISHED ITZA MEJIA, as mother and natural * guardian of B.M., and SAMUEL MEJIA * as father and natural guardian of B.M., *

* Special Master Dorsey Petitioners, *

* v. *

* Joint Stipulation on Damages; SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Hepatitis A vaccine; Seizures; AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Death.

* Respondent. *

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Jeffrey S. Pop, Beverly Hills, CA, for petitioner.

Gordon Elliot Shemin, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

DECISION1 On March 6, 2014, Itza and Samuel Mejia (“petitioners”) filed a petition for compensation on behalf of their minor child, B.M., pursuant to the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.2 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 to -34 (2006). Petitioners alleged that B.M.’s death was a result of a hepatitis A vaccine administered to her on March 5, 2012. See Petition at 1.

On January 9, 2015, the parties filed a stipulation, stating that a decision should be entered awarding compensation.

Respondent denies that B.M.’s death was caused in fact by her receipt of the hepatitis A vaccine and denies that the hepatitis A vaccine caused any other injury. Nevertheless, the parties agree to the joint stipulation, attached hereto as Appendix A. The undersigned finds the stipulation reasonable and adopts it as the decision of the Court in awarding damages, on the terms set forth therein.

The parties stipulated that petitioner shall receive the following compensation: A lump sum of $200,000.00, in the form of a check payable to petitioners as the legal representatives of B.M.’s estate. This amount represent compensation for all damages that would be available under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a).

Stipulation ¶ 8.

The undersigned approves the requested amount for petitioner’s compensation. Accordingly, an award should be made consistent with the stipulation.

In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the clerk of the court SHALL ENTER JUDGMENT in accordance with the terms of the parties’ stipulation.3

IT IS SO ORDERED. s/ Nora Beth Dorsey Nora Beth Dorsey Special Master

1 Because this decision contains a reasoned explanation for the undersigned’s action in this case, the undersigned intends to post this ruling on the website of the United States Court of Federal Claims, in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-347, § 205, 116 Stat. 2899, 2913 (codified as amended at 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2006)). As provided by Vaccine Rule 18(b), each party has 14 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). 2 The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program is set forth in Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755, codified as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 to -34 (2006) (Vaccine Act or the Act). All citations in this decision to individual sections of the Vaccine Act are to 42 U.S.C.A. § 300aa. 3 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment is expedited by the parties’ joint filing of notice renouncing the right to seek review.

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.