1

In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

Filed: February 7, 2019

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

STEPHEN ACKER, * No. 17-242V

*

Petitioner, * Special Master Sanders

*

v. *

 *

SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Decision on Proffer; Damages; Influenza

AND HUMAN SERVICES, * (“Flu”) Vaccine; Guillain-Barré Syndrome

 * (“GBS”)

 Respondent. *

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

Paul A. Kinne, Gingras, Cates & Luebke, S.C., Madison, WI, for Petitioner.

Lara Ann Englund, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1

On February 21, 2017, Stephen Acker (“Petitioner”) filed a petition for compensation 

pursuant to the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.2 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-10 to 34 

(2012). Petitioner alleged that the quadrivalent influenza vaccine he received on October 1, 2015,

caused him to develop Guillain-Barré Syndrome (“GBS”). Pet. at 1, ECF No. 1. Petitioner further 

alleged that “[a]s a result of GBS, [he] was rendered largely bed-ridden[.]” Id. at 3.

On September 26, 2017, Respondent filed a Rule 4(c) Report, in which he concluded that 

“[P]etitioner [had] suffered an injury that is compensable under the National Childhood Vaccine 

Injury Act of 1986[.]” Resp’t’s Proffer at 1, ECF No. 32. On September 26, 2017, the undersigned 

issued a Ruling on Entitlement consistent with Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report. ECF No. 18.

On January 5, 2019, Respondent filed a Proffer on Award of Compensation (“Proffer”). 

 

1 This decision shall be posted on the website of the United States Court of Federal Claims, in accordance 

with the E-Government Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-347, § 205, 116 Stat. 2899, 2913 (codified as amended 

at 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012)). This means the Decision will be available to anyone with access to 

the Internet. As provided by Vaccine Rule 18(b), each party has 14 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). Further, consistent with 

the rule requirement, a motion for redaction must include a proposed redacted decision. If, upon review, 

the undersigned agrees that the identified material fits within the requirements of that provision, such 

material will be deleted from public access.

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755.
2

ECF No. 32. Based on the record as a whole, the undersigned finds that Petitioner is entitled to an 

award as stated in the Proffer.

Pursuant to the terms stated in the Proffer, attached as Appendix A, the undersigned awards 

Petitioner:

A lump sum payment of $255,829.99, representing all elements of 

compensation to which Petitioner would be entitled under 42 U.S.C. §

300aa-15(a), in the form of a check payable to Petitioner.

Id.

In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the Clerk of the 

Court shall enter judgment in accordance herewith.

3

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Herbrina D. Sanders

 Herbrina D. Sanders

Special Master

 

3 Entry of judgment can be expedited by each party’s filing of a notice renouncing the right to seek review. 

Vaccine Rule 11(a).
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

 

STEPHEN ACKER, ) 

 ) 

 Petitioner, ) 

 ) 

 v. ) No. 17-242V 

 ) Special Master Herbrina Sanders

SECRETARY OF ) 

HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, ) 

 ) 

 Respondent. ) 

 ) 

RESPONDENT’S PROFFER ON AWARD OF COMPENSATION

On September 26, 2017, respondent filed a Vaccine Rule 4(c) report concluding that 

petitioner suffered an injury that is compensable under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury 

Act of 1986, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§300aa-10 to -34. Accordingly, on September 26, 2017, 

the Special Master issued a Ruling on Entitlement. 

I. Items of Compensation 

 Respondent proffers that petitioner should be awarded $255,829.99. This amount 

represents all elements of compensation to which petitioner would be entitled under 42 U.S.C. 

§ 300aa-15(a). Petitioner agrees.

II. Form of the Award 

Respondent recommends that the compensation provided to petitioner should be made 

through a lump sum payment of $255,829.99 in the form of a check payable to petitioner.1

 This 

 

1 Should petitioner die prior to entry of judgment, the parties reserve the right to move the Court 

for appropriate relief. In particular, respondent would oppose any award for future medical 

expenses, future pain and suffering, and future lost wages. 
2 

lump sum payment represents all elements of compensation to which petitioner would be entitled 

under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). Petitioner agrees. 

Petitioner is a competent adult. Evidence of guardianship is not required in this case. 

Respectfully submitted,

JOSEPH H. HUNT

Assistant Attorney General

C. SALVATORE D’ALESSIO

Acting Director

Torts Branch, Civil Division 

CATHARINE E. REEVES

Deputy Director

Torts Branch, Civil Division 

GABRIELLE FIELDING

Assistant Director

Torts Branch, Civil Division 

s/ LARA A. ENGLUND

LARA A. ENGLUND

Trial Attorney

Torts Branch, Civil Division 

U.S. Department of Justice 

P.O. Box 146 Benjamin Franklin Station 

Washington D.C. 20044-0146 

Tel: (202) 307-3013 

E-mail: lara.a.englund@usdoj.gov 

Dated: February 5, 2019