United States Court of Federal Claims, 2015

Akyuz v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Decided September 30, 2015 · Denise Kathryn Vowell

Opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 15-201V Filed: September 2, 2015

Unpublished **************************** MARILYN AKYUZ, *

Petitioner, * Damages Decision Based on Proffer;

* Trivalent Influenza (“Flu”); * Vaccine; Shoulder Injury

SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Related to Vaccine Administration AND HUMAN SERVICES, * (“SIRVA”); Special Processing Unit

Respondent. * (“SPU”)

**************************** Ronald Homer, Conway, Homer & Chin-Caplan, P.C., Boston, MA, for petitioner. Sarah Duncan, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1

Vowell, Special Master:

On March 2, 2015, Marilyn Akyuz filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq.,2 [the “Vaccine Act” or “Program”]. The petition alleges that as a result of a trivalent influenza [“flu”] vaccination on October 7, 2013, petitioner suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration [“SIRVA”]. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On June 22, 2015, I issued a ruling on entitlement, finding petitioner entitled to compensation for SIRVA. On September 1, 2015, respondent filed a proffer on award of compensation [“Proffer”] indicating that petitioner should be awarded compensation in the amount of $127,500.00. Proffer at 1.

Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Proffer, I award petitioner a lump sum payment of $127,500.00 in the form of a check payable to petitioner, Marilyn Akyuz. This amount represents compensation for all damages that would be available under § 300aa-15(a).

The clerk of the court is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this decision.3 IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Denise K. Vowell Denise K. Vowell Special Master

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

) MARILYN AKYUZ, )

) Petitioner, )

) No. 15-0201V v. ) Chief Special Master Vowell

) ECF SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN ) SERVICES, )

) Respondent. )

)

PROFFER ON AWARD OF COMPENSATION

I. Items of Compensation

Based upon the evidence of record, respondent proffers that petitioner should be awarded $127,500.00, which represents all elements of compensation to which petitioner would be entitled under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). 1 Petitioner agrees.

II. Form of the Award

Respondent recommends that the compensation provided to petitioner should be made through a lump sum payment of $127,500.00, in the form of a check payable to petitioner. Petitioner agrees.

Respectfully submitted, BENJAMIN C. MIZER Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General RUPA BHATTACHARYYA Director Torts Branch, Civil Division VINCENT J. MATANOSKI Deputy Director Torts Branch, Civil Division LINDA S. RENZI Senior Trial Counsel Torts Branch, Civil Division s/ Sarah C. Duncan Sarah C. Duncan Trial Attorney Torts Branch, Civil Division U.S. Department of Justice P.O. Box 146 Benjamin Franklin Station Washington, D.C. 20044-0146 Tel: (202) 514-9729 Fax: (202) 616-4310

Date: September 1, 2015

1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I intend to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, 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)). 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 “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa (2012). 3 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment can be expedited by each party filing a notice renouncing the right to seek review. 1 Should petitioner die prior to the entry of judgment, the parties reserve the right to move the Court for appropriate relief. In particular, respondent would oppose any award for future medical expenses, future lost earnings, and future pain and suffering.

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