# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

Filed: April 26, 2018

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * UNPUBLISHED TAYLOR LEE REYNOLDS, *

* No. 15 -1258 v Petitioner, *

*

v. * Chief Special Master Dorsey

*

SECRETARY OF HEALTH * AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Decision Based on Stipulation;

* Dtap; Cardiomyopathy;

Respondent. * Exacerbation of Pre-Existing

* Condition

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

William Geddes, Geddes Law Firm, P.C., Reno, NV, for petitioner. Christine Becer, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for respondent.

DECISION BASED ON STIPULATION 1

On October 27, 2015

, Taylor Lee Reynolds (“petitioner”) filed a petition in the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. 2 Petitioner alleges that as a result of the Tetanus Diphtheria Acellular Pertuss is ( “ Tdap ” ) vaccine administered on October 29, 2013

, petitioner

suffered from an exacerbation of pre

- existing cardiomyopathy . Petition at 1

.

1 This decision will be posted on the website of the United States 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 published Decision’s inclusion of certain kinds of confidential information. Specifically, Under Vaccine Rule 18(b), each party has 14 days within which to request redacti on “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 u nwarranted invasion of privacy.” Vaccine Rule 18(b). Otherwise, the whole decision will be available to the public in its current form. Id.

2 The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program is set forth in Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755, codified as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 to - 34 (2012) (“Vaccine Act” or “the Act”). All citations in this decision to individual sections of the Vaccine Act are to 42 U.S.C.A. § 300aa.2

On April 25, 2018, the parties filed a stipulation recommending an award of compensation to petitioner. Stipulation (ECF No. 64). Respondent denies that the Dtap vaccine caused petitioner to suffer from exacerbation of cardiomyopathy, or any other injury or his

current condition. Nevertheless, the parties agree to the joint stipulation, attached hereto as Appendix A. 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:

(1) A lump sum of $125,000.00, in the form of a check payable to petitioner.

This amount represents compensation for all damages that would be available under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). Joint Stipulation at ¶ 8.

The undersigned approves the requested amount for petitioner ’ s compensation. Accordingly, an award should be made consistent with the stipulation.

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

Court SHALL ENTER JUDGMENT in accordance with the terms of the parties’ stipulation. 3

Any questions regarding this Order may be directed to the undersigned’s law clerk, Mark Hollaar, at (202) 357-6379, or mark_hollaar@cfc.uscourts.gov

.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Nora B. Dorsey Nora B. Dorsey Chief Special Master

3 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment is expedited by the parties’ joint filing of notice renouncing the right to seek review.