In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS 

No. 16-460V 

Filed: November 17, 2016 

UNPUBLISHED 

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

LINDA K. RUSSELL, * 

 * 

 Petitioner, * Joint Stipulation on Damages; 

v. * Influenza (“Flu”); Shoulder Injury 

 * Related to Vaccine Administration 

SECRETARY OF HEALTH * (“SIRVA”); Special Processing 

AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Unit (“SPU”) 

 * 

 Respondent. * 

 * 

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

Daniel Leeper, Leeper & Leeper, St. Petersburg, FL, for petitioner. 

Jennifer Reynaud, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent. 

DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1

Dorsey, Chief Special Master: 

 On April 11, 2016, 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 she suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine 

administration (“SIRVA”) following an influenza (“flu”) vaccination administered on 

October 19, 2013. Petition at 1; Stipulation, filed November 16, 2016, at ¶¶ 2, 3. 

Petitioner further alleges the vaccine was administered within the United States, that 

she suffered the residual effects of her alleged injury for more than six months, and that 

there has been no prior award or settlement of a civil action for damages on her behalf. 

Petition at 1, 9; Stipulation at ¶¶ 3-5. “Respondent denies that petitioner’s alleged 

shoulder injury and residual effects were caused-in-fact by the flu vaccine. Respondent 

further denies that the flu vaccine caused petitioner any other injury or her 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1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the 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 16, 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 $105,529.92 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.