Court Opinion

ID: 8405530
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-10-26 17:01:15.994667+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:46:54.444491
License: Public Domain

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
                                 OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
                                         No. 17-1257V
                                      (not to be published)

    ************************* *
                                *
    GLENN REINHARDT,            *
                                *
                                *                          Filed: October 4, 2022
                    Petitioner, *
                                *
    v.                          *
                                *                          Decision by Stipulation; Damages;
                                *                          Influenza (“Flu”) Vaccine; Optic Neuritis
    SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND     *                          (“ON”).
    HUMAN SERVICES,             *
                                *
                                *
                    Respondent. *
                                *
    ************************* *

Michael Baseluos, Baseluos Law Firm, PLLC, San Antonio, TX, for Petitioner
Julia Collison, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent

                              DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1

        On September 15, 2017, Glenn Reinhardt (“Petitioner”) filed a petition, seeking
compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (“the Vaccine
Program”).2 Pet., ECF No. 1. Petitioner alleges he suffered from optic neuritis (“ON”) as a result
of the influenza (“flu”) vaccination he received on October 11, 2016. See Stipulation ¶ 2, dated
October 4, 2022 (ECF No. 210); see also Pet. at 1. On April 2, 2021, I issued a Ruling on
Entitlement finding that Petitioner was entitled to compensation. ECF No. 122.

1
 Although this Decision has been formally designated “not to be published,” it will nevertheless be posted
on the 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 Decision’s inclusion of
certain kinds of confidential information. Specifically, under Vaccine Rule 18(b), each party has fourteen
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 Decision in its present form will be available. Id.
2
 The Vaccine Program comprises Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L.
No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755 (codified as amended at 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-10–34 (2012)) (hereinafter
“Vaccine Act” or “the Act”). All subsequent references to sections of the Vaccine Act shall be to the
pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa.
       Respondent “continues to maintain his contrary position, but will not seek review of the
Special Master’s determination of entitlement upon its memorialization as a reviewable decision.”
See Stipulation ¶ 4. Nonetheless, both parties, while maintaining their above-stated positions,
agreed in a stipulation filed October 4, 2022 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:

       1. A Lump Sum

           A lump sum of $2,247,225.67, which amount represents compensation for first-year
           life care expenses ($27,954.01), past lost earnings ($453,427.00), future lost earnings
           ($1,510,689.00), pain and suffering ($250,000.00), and past unreimbursable expenses
           ($5,155.66) in the form of a check payable to Petitioner.

       2. An Annuity

       The remainder of damages shall be paid in the form of an annuity contract, which shall be
purchased as soon as practicable after entry of judgment. Accordingly, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §
300aa-15(f)(4), I order Respondent to purchase, and take ownership of, an annuity contract as
described below:

       Each Life Insurance Company must meet the following criteria:

       1. Have a minimum of $250,000,000 of capital and surplus, exclusive of any mandatory
          security valuation reserve; and

       2. have one of the following ratings from two of the following rating organizations:
          a) A.M. Best Company: A++, A+, A+g, A+p, A+r, or A+s;
          b) Moody’s Investor Service Claims Paying Rating: Aa3, Aa2, Aa1, or Aaa;
          c) Standard and Poor’s Corporation Insurer Claims-Paying Ability Rating: AA-, AA,
             AA+, or AAA;
          d) Fitch Credit Rating Company, Insurance Company Claims-Paying Ability Rating:
             AA-, AA, AA+, or AAA.

The Secretary of Health and Human Services shall purchase an annuity contract from the Life
Insurance Company for the benefit of Glenn Reinhardt, pursuant to which the Life Insurance
Company will agree to make payments periodically to Glenn Reinhardt as described in paragraph
9 of the attached Stipulation. 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.