In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 17-1596V

(Not to be published)

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

RICHARD HIRSCH, *

*

Petitioner, * Filed: March 15, 2019

*

v. * Decision by Stipulation; Damages;

* Influenza (“Flu”) Vaccine.

*

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND *

HUMAN SERVICES, *

*

Respondent. *

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

Maximillian J. Muller, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA, for Petitioner.

Claudia Barnes Gangi, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1

On October 24, 2017, Petitioner Richard Hirsch filed a petition seeking compensation 

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

ECF No. 1. Petitioner alleges that he developed left shoulder injuries as a result of receiving an 

influenza (“flu”) vaccination on October 28, 2016. See Stipulation ¶ 4, dated March 4, 2019 (ECF 

No. 18); See also Petition. 

 

1 Because this decision contains a reasoned explanation for my action in this case, I will post this decision 

on the United States Court of Federal Claims’ website, 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 (2006)). 

As provided by 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-12(d)(4)(B), however, the parties may object to the posted decision’s 

inclusion of certain kinds of confidential information. Specifically, under 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). Otherwise, the whole decision will be available to the public. (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.A. ' 300aa10-' 300aa-34 (West 1991 & Supp. 2002). All citations in this decision to individual sections of the Vaccine 

Act are to 42 U.S.C.A. ' 300aa.
2

Respondent denies “that the flu vaccination caused [P]etitioner’s SIRVA or any other 

injury or his current condition.” See Stipulation ¶ 6. Nonetheless both parties, while maintaining 

their above-stated positions, agreed in a stipulation filed March 14, 2019 that the issues before 

them can be settled and that a decision should be entered awarding Petitioner compensation.

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 $75,293.56 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 amount 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.