In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS 

No. 16-96V 

Filed: November 22, 2016 

UNPUBLISHED 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

TIMOTHY NEEL, * 

 * 

 Petitioner, * Joint Stipulation on Damages; 

v. * Influenza (“Flu”) Vaccine; 

 * Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine 

SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Administration (“SIRVA”); 

AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Special Processing Unit (“SPU”)

 * 

 Respondent. * 

 * 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Dustin Lujan, Richard Gage, P.C., Cheyenne, WY, for petitioner. 

Lara Englund, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent. 

DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1

Dorsey, Chief Special Master: 

 On January 19, 2016, Timothy Neel (“petitioner”) 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 the influenza vaccine he received on 

October 22, 2014 resulted in a chronic left shoulder injury. Petition at ¶¶ 2, 6; see also 

Stipulation, filed Nov. 22, 2016, at ¶¶ 1-2, 4. Petitioner further alleges that he received 

the vaccination in the United States, suffered the residual effects of his injury for more 

than six months, and neither he nor anyone else to his knowledge has participated in or 

collected an award or settlement from any civil action for his injury alleged as vaccine 

caused. Petition at ¶¶ 2, 7-8; see also Stipulation at ¶¶ 3-5. “Respondent denies that 

the flu vaccine is the cause of petitioner’s alleged SIRVA or any other injury or his

current condition.” Stipulation at ¶ 6. 

 

1

 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the 

undersigned intends 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). 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, the undersigned agrees that the identified material fits 

within this definition, the undersigned 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).
2 

Nevertheless, on November 22, 2016, the parties filed the attached joint 

stipulation, stating that a decision should be entered awarding compensation. 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 stipulate that petitioner shall receive the following compensation: 

A lump sum of $67,500.00, 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 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). Id. 

The undersigned approves 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/Nora Beth Dorsey 

 Nora Beth Dorsey 

 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.