United States Court of Federal Claims, 2025

Hightower v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Decided October 6, 2025 · Brian H. Corcoran

Opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 24-0137V

ROBERT HIGHTOWER, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: September 4, 2025 v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent.

Timothy James Lessman, Knutson & Casey Law Firm, Mankato, MN, for Petitioner.

Benjamin Rex Eisenberg, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1 On January 30, 2024, Robert Hightower filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq.2 (the “Vaccine Act”), which he amended on July 16, 2024. Petitioner alleges that he suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) resulting from an influenza vaccine received on October 25, 2021. Amended Petition at 1; Stipulation, filed September 3, 2025, at ¶¶ 2-4. Petitioner further alleges that the vaccine was administered in the United States, he experienced residual effects of his injury for more than six months, and there has been no prior award or settlement of a civil action for damages on Petitioner’s behalf because of his alleged injury. Amended Petition at ¶¶ 4, 14, 15; Stipulation at ¶¶ 3-5. “Respondent denies that petitioner sustained a SIRVA Table injury; denies that the vaccine caused petitioner’s alleged injury, or any other injury; and denies that petitioner’s current condition is a sequela of a vaccine-related injury.” Stipulation at ¶ 6.

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).

Nevertheless, on September 3, 2025, 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 $24,500.00, to be paid through an ACH deposit to Petitioner’s counsel’s IOLTA account for prompt disbursement 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 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.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.