Court Opinion

ID: 4531960
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2020-05-06 12:01:38.047165+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:27:09.758761
License: Public Domain

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
                                  OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
                                          No. 18-1672V
                                         UNPUBLISHED

    KARLEE TESSMER,                                           Chief Special Master Corcoran

                         Petitioner,                          Filed: April 3, 2020
    v.
                                                              Special Processing Unit (SPU);
    SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND                                   Damages Decision Based on Proffer;
    HUMAN SERVICES,                                           Influenza (Flu) Vaccine; Guillain-
                                                              Barre Syndrome (GBS)
                        Respondent.

Bridget Candace McCullough, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA, for petitioner.

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

                                DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES 1

       On October 30, 2018, Karlee Tessmer 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 Guillain-Barre Syndrome (“GBS”) as
a result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccine administered on September 30, 2011. Petition at
1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special
Masters.

       On April 3, 2020, a ruling on entitlement was issued, finding Petitioner entitled to
compensation for GBS. On March 31, 2020, Respondent filed a Rule 4(c) Report
Conceding Entitlement to Compensation and Proffer on Damages (“Rule 4(c) and
Proffer”) indicating Petitioner should be awarded $125,000.00. Rule 4(c) and Proffer at
5. In the Proffer, Respondent represented that Petitioner agrees with the proffered

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  Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am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 pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. §
300aa (2012).
award. Id. Based on the record as a whole, I find that Petitioner is entitled to an award
as stated in the Proffer.

     Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Proffer, I award Petitioner a lump
sum payment 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 § 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.

                                                      2