In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 20-350V 

(not to be published) 

 

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

KRISTINA PEARSON, 

 Petitioner, 

v. 

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES, 

 Respondent. 

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

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

Filed: June 16, 2021 

Decision by Stipulation; Damages; 

Influenza (“Flu”) Vaccine; Transverse 

Myelitis (“TM”). 

Glen H. Sturtevant, Jr., Rawls Law Group, Richmond, VA, for Petitioner 

Mark K. Hellie, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent 

DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1

On March 27, 2020, Kristina Pearson (“Petitioner”) filed a petition, seeking compensation 

under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (“the Vaccine Program”).2 Pet., ECF 

No. 1. Petitioner alleges she suffered from transverse myelitis (“TM”) as a result of the influenza 

(“flu”) vaccination she received on October 11, 2018. See Stipulation ¶ 2, 4, dated June 15, 2021 

(ECF No. 38); see also Petition. 

Respondent denies “that the flu vaccine caused petitioner’s alleged TM or any other injury 

1 Although this Decision has been formally designated “not to be published,” it will nevertheless be posted 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 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. 3755 (codified as amended at 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-10–34 (2012)) (hereinafter 

“Vaccine Act” or “the Act”). All subsequent references to sections of the Vaccine Act shall be to the 

pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa. 
or her current condition.” See Stipulation ¶ 6. Nonetheless, both parties, while maintaining their 

above-stated positions, agreed in a stipulation filed June 15, 2021 that the issues before them can 

be settled and that a decision should be entered awarding Petitioner compensation. 

I have reviewed the file, and based upon that review, I conclude that the parties’ stipulation 

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 $190,000.00 in the form of a check payable to petitioner. 

Stipulation ¶ 8. This award represents compensation for all damages that would be available under 

42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). 

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/ Katherine E. Oler 

 Katherine E. Oler 

 Special Master 

3

 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties may expedite entry of judgment by jointly filing notice 

renouncing their right to seek review.