# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 16-809V

Filed: July 11, 2017

UNPUBLISHED

LUISA GOMES,

Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent. Special Processing Unit (SPU);

Damages Decision Based on Proffer;

Tetanus Diphtheria acellular

Pertussis (Tdap) Vaccine; Shoulder

Injury Related to Vaccine

Administration (SIRVA)

Ronald Craig Homer, C onway, Homer, P.C., Bost on, MA, for petitioner.

Traci R. Patton, U.S. D epartment of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES 1

Dorsey , Chief Special Master:

On July 7, 2016, petitioner filed a pet ition 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 suffe red a shoulder injury related to vaccine

administration (“SIRVA”) following a Tetanus -diphtheria-acellular-pertussis (“Tdap”)

vaccination. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the

Office of Special Masters.

On December 15, 2016, a ruling on entitle ment was issued, finding petitioner

entitled to compensation for a SIRVA. On July 10, 2017, respondent filed a proffer on

award of compensation (“Proffe r”) indicating petitioner should be awarded $75,276.18.

Proffer at 1. In the Proffer, respondent represented that petit ioner agrees with the

1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the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 inform ation, the disclosure of which would constitute an

unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, t he 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 proffered award. 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 stat ed in the attached Proffer, the undersigned awards

petitioner a lump sum payment of $75,276. 18 in the form of a check payable to

petitioner, Luisa Gomes. This amount represents compens ation for all damages that

would be available un der § 300aa-15(a).

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 c an 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

LUISA GOMES,

Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN

SERVICES,

Respondent. )

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

) No. 16

- 809V

Chief Special Master Dorsey

ECF

RESPONDENT’S PROFFER ON AWARD OF COMPENSATION

I. Compensation for Vaccine Injury

- Related Items

On December 15, 2016 , Chief Special Master Dorsey issued a Ruling on Entitlement

finding that petitioner was entitled to vaccine compensation for her Shoulder Injury Related to

Vaccine Administration (“SIRVA”). Based on the evidence of record, r espondent proffers that

petitioner should be awarded $ 75

, 276.18

. This amount represents all elements of compensation

to which petitioner would be entitled unde r 42 U.S.C. § 300aa

- 15(a)

. Petitioner agrees.

II. Form of the Award

The parties recommend that compensation provided to petitioner should be made through

a lump sum payment of $ 75,276.18 , in the form of a check payable to petitioner. 1 Petitioner

agrees.

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

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 lost earnings

and future pain and suffering.Respectfully submitted,

CHAD A. READLER

Acting Assistant Attorney General

C. SALVATORE D’ALESSIO

Acting Director

Torts Branch, Civil Divisi on

CATHARINE E. REEVES

Deputy Director

Torts Branch, Civil Division

HEATHER L. PEARLMAN

Assistant Director

Torts Branch, Civil Division

s/ Traci R. Patton

TRACI R. PATTON

Senior Trial Attorney

Torts Branch, Civil Division

U.S. Department of Justice

P.O. Box 146

Benjamin Franklin Station

Washington, D.C. 20044

- 0146

Telephone: (202) 353

- 1589

Dated: July 10 , 201 7