Arrant v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 19-294V UNPUBLISHED

LEONARD ARRANT, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: September 3, 2020 v. Special Processing Unit (SPU); Joint SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND Stipulation on Damages; Tetanus HUMAN SERVICES, Diphtheria acellular Pertussis (Tdap) Vaccine; Brachial Neuritis; Shoulder Respondent. Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA)

William E. Cochran, Jr., Black McLaren Jones Ryland & Griffee, P.C., Memphis, TN , for petitioner.

Colleen Clemons Hartley, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION 1 On February 25, 2019, Leonard Arrant 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 as a result of his September 15, 2016 Tetanus diphtheria acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccination he suffered a Table injury of Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA), or alternatively a Table injury of brachial neuritis, or a shoulder injury caused in fact by vaccination. Petition at 1; Stipulation, filed at September 2, 2020, ¶¶ 2, 4. Petitioner further alleges the vaccine was administered within the United States, that he suffered the residual effects of his injury for more than six months, and that there has been no prior award or settlement of a civil action on his behalf as a result of his injury. Stipulation at ¶¶ 3-5; see Petition at ¶¶2, 21.

“Respondent denies that petitioner sustained a SIRVA Table injury or a brachial neuritis Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in accordance with the E- Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (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.

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).

Table injury; denies that the vaccine caused petitioner’s alleged shoulder injuries, or any other injury; and denies that his current condition is a sequelae of a vaccine-related injury.” Stipulation at ¶ 6.

Nevertheless, on September 2, 2020, the parties filed the attached joint stipulation, stating that a decision should be entered awarding compensation. I find the stipulation reasonable and adopt it as my decision awarding damages, on the terms set forth therein.

Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Stipulation, I award the following compensation: A lump sum of $47,780.00 in the form of a check payable to Petitioner.

Stipulation at ¶ 8. This amount represents compensation for all items of damages that would be available under Section 15(a). Id. I approve the requested amount for Petitioner’s compensation. In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the clerk of the 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

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.