# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 18

- 31 V

UNPUBLISHED

PRESCILLA LAURILLA

,

Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent. Chief Special Master Corcoran

Filed: July 13, 2020

Special Processing Unit (SPU);

Damages Decision Based on Proffer;

Tetanus Diphtheria acellular

Pertussis (Tdap) Vaccine; Shoulder

Injury Related to Vaccine

Administration (SIRVA)

Brian L. Cinelli, Marcu s & Cinelli, LLP , Williamsville, NY , for petitioner.

James Vincent Lopez , U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES 1

On January 5, 20 18

, Prescilla Laurilla 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 Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine

Administration ( “ SIRVA ” ) as a result of her February 2 4 , 2015 Tetanus Diphtheria

acellular Pertussis ( “ Tdap ” ) v accin ation

. Petition at 1, 14

- 15

. The case was assigned to

the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On February 14, 20 19

, a ruling on entitlement was issued , finding P etitioner

entitled to compensation for SIRVA . On July 10, 2020

, R espondent filed a p roffer on

a ward of compensation (“Proffer”) indicating P etitioner should be awarded $ 95,000 ( t his

amount constitute s damages for pain and suffering )

. Proffer at 1

. In the Proffer,

1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am

required 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). This means the decision will be available to anyone with access

to the internet. 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, I agree that the identified material fits within this definition, I 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 pe rtinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. §

300aa (2012).2 R espondent represented that P etitioner agrees with the proffered award. Id. Based on

the record as a whole, I find that P etitioner is entitled to an award as stated in the

Proffer.

Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Proffer, I award P etitioner a lump

sum payment of $ 95,000 (this amount constitutes damages for pain and suffering)

in the form of a check payable to P etitioner

. This amount represents compensation

for all damages that w ould be available under § 15 (a)

.

The clerk of the court is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this

decision. 3

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Brian H. Corcoran

Brian H. Corcoran

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.IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

___________________________________ )

PRESCILLA LAURILLA, )

)

Petitioner, )

) No. 18

- 31V

v. ) Chief Special Master Corcoran

) ECF

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND )

HUMAN SERVICES, )

)

Respondent. )

____________________________________)

RESPONDENT’S PROFFER ON AWARD OF COMPENSATION

I. Compensation for Vaccine Injury

- Related Items

On February 12

, 2019 , respondent filed a Rule 4(c) Report conceding that petitioner is

entitled to vaccine compensation for her Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Admini stration

(“SIRVA”) injury suffered following receipt of a tetanus, diphtheria, and acellular pertussis

( “ Tdap”) vaccination on February 24, 2015

. On February 14, 2019, a Ruling on Entitlement,

adopting respondent’s recommendation, was issued.

Based upon the evidence of record, respondent proffers that petitioner 1 should be

awarded $ 9 5,000

. This amount constitutes damages for pain and suffering, and represents all

elements of compensation to which petitioner would be entitled under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa

- 15(a). 2

Petitioner agrees.

1 Petitioner is a competent adult, therefore evidence of guardianship is not required in this case.

2 Should Petitioner die prior to entry of judgment, the parties reserve the right to move the Court

for appropriate relief.II. Form of the Award

Respondent recommends that the compensation provided to petitioner should be made

through:

a lump sum of $ 9 5

, 000 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).

Petitioner agrees.

Respectfully submitted,

ETHAN P. DAVIS

Acting Assistant Attorney General

C. SALVATORE D’ALESSIO

Acting Director

Torts Branch, Civil Division

CATHARINE E. REEVES

Deputy Director

Torts Branch, Civil Division

GABRIELLE M. FIELDING

Assistant Director

Torts Branch, Civil Division

s/ JAMES V. LOPEZ

James V. Lopez

Trial Attorney

Torts Branch, Civil Division

U.S. Department of Justice

P.O. Box 146, Ben Franklin Station

Washington, D.C. 20044

- 0146

Tel: (202) 616

- 3655

Fax: (202) 616

- 4310

Email: james.lopez@usdoj.gov

Dated: July 10, 2020