Court Opinion

ID: 4204638
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2017-09-20 12:03:09.596192+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:41:14.039474
License: Public Domain

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
                                 OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
                                          No. 16-1313V
                                    Filed: February 21, 2017
                                         UNPUBLISHED

****************************
ELAINE ROSS,                             *
                                         *
                    Petitioner,          *
                                         *      Damages Decision Based on Proffer;
v.                                       *      Influenza Vaccine (“Flu Vaccine”);
                                         *      Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine
SECRETARY OF HEALTH                      *      Administration (“SIRVA”);
AND HUMAN SERVICES,                      *      Special Processing Unit (“SPU”)
                                         *
                    Respondent.          *
                                         *
****************************
Carol L. Gallagher, Carol L. Gallagher, Esquire, LLC, Linwood, NJ, for petitioner.
Darryl R. Wishard, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

                               DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1

Dorsey, Chief Special Master:

        On October 11, 2016, Elaine Ross (“petitioner”) 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 alleged that she suffered a shoulder injury from an
influenza (“flu”) vaccination she received on October 22, 2014. Petition at 1. The case
was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

        On January 17, 2017, the undersigned issued a ruling on entitlement, finding
petitioner entitled to compensation. (ECF No. 17). On February 21, 2017, respondent
filed a proffer on award of compensation (“Proffer”) indicating petitioner should be
awarded $185,000.00. Proffer at 1-2. In the Proffer, respondent represented that
petitioner agrees with the proffered award. Id. at 2. Based on the record as a whole,
the undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to an award as stated in the Proffer.
1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the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 information, the disclosure of which would constitute an
unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, the undersigned agrees that the identified material fits
within this definition, the undersigned will redact such material from public access.

2National 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).
       Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Proffer, the undersigned awards
petitioner a lump sum payment of $185,000.00 in the form of a check payable to
petitioner, Elaine Ross. This amount represents compensation for all damages that
would be available under § 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 can be expedited by the parties’ joint filing of notice
renouncing the right to seek review.

                                                      2