In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 20-1483V 

(not to be published) 

 

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

CARMEN C. SALAS, 

 Petitioner, 

v. 

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES, 

 Respondent. 

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

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

Filed: February 11, 2022 

Decision by Stipulation; Damages; 

Influenza (“flu”) Vaccine; Optic Acute 

Idiopathic Blind Spot Enlargement 

(“AIBSE”). 

Roberto E. Ruiz-Comas, RC Legal & Litigation Services PSC, San Juan, PR, for Petitioner 

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

DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1

On October 28, 2020, Carmen C. Salas (“Petitioner”) filed a petition seeking compensation 

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

No. 1. Petitioner alleges that she suffered from optic acute idiopathic blind spot enlargement 

(“AIBSE”) as a result of the influenza (“flu”) vaccine she received on November 14, 2017. See

Stipulation ¶ 2, 4, dated February 8, 2022 (ECF No. 29); see also Petition. 

1 Although this Decision has been formally designated “not to be published,” it will nevertheless be posted 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. 
Respondent denies “that the vaccines caused alleged AIBSE, or any other injury; and 

denies that her current condition is a sequelae of a vaccine-related injury.” See Stipulation ¶ 6. 

Nonetheless, both parties, while maintaining their above-stated positions, agreed in a stipulation 

dated February 8, 2022 that the issues before them can be settled and that a decision should be 

entered awarding Petitioner compensation. ECF No. 29. 

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 $95,00.00 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 amounts 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.