United States Court of Federal Claims, 2018

Sotirhos v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Decided December 3, 2018 · Brian H. Corcoran

Opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 17-290V (not to be published)

************************* DAYNA SOTIRHOS, *

* * Special Master Corcoran *

Petitioner, * Filed: October 19, 2018

* v. *

* Decision by Stipulation; Damages; SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Influenza (“flu”) Vaccine; Shoulder AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Injury Related to Vaccine Administration

* (“SIRVA”).

Respondent. *

* ************************* Bruce William Sloane, Law Office of Bruce W. Sloane, PC, White Plains, NY, for Petitioner. Daniel Anthony Principato, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1

On March 1, 2017, Dayna Sotirhos filed a petition seeking compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.2 ECF No. 1. Petitioner alleges that she suffered from a Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (“SIRVA”) as a result of her November 11, 2014 influenza (“flu”) vaccine. Id. at 1. Respondent initially recommended that Petitioner be denied compensation in his Rule 4(c) Report. See generally ECF No. 11. Ms. Sotirhos amended her petition on December 12, 2017. ECF No. 19. Respondent subsequently agreed to participate in settlement negotiations, though he maintained his position that the flu vaccine did not cause Petitioner’s injury. See Stip. at 1, ECF No. 28. The Parties filed a stipulation on October 10, 2018. Id.

Based upon my own review of the record, I conclude that the parties’ stipulation (as attached hereto) 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 $60,000.00, in the form of a check payable to Petitioner. Stip. at 2. This amount represents compensation for all damages under Section 15(a) of the Act to which Petitioner is entitled.

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/ Brian H. Corcoran

Brian H. Corcoran Special Master

1 Although this Decision has been formally designated “not to be published,” it will nevertheless be posted on the Court of Federal Claims’ website in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002, 44 U.S.C. § 3501 (2012).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 whole 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. 3758, codified as amended at 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-10 through 34 (2012) (“Vaccine Act” or “the Act”). 3 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties may expedite entry of judgment by each filing (either jointly or separately) a notice renouncing their right to seek review.

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