Court Opinion

ID: 4242121
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2018-02-02 21:04:11.710827+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:44:02.482809
License: Public Domain

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
                                 OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
                                         No. 16-1146V
                                     Filed: August 8, 2017
                                        UNPUBLISHED

    BETHANY RITTING,
                                                             Special Processing Unit (SPU);
                        Petitioner,                          Damages Decision Based on Proffer;
    v.                                                       Influenza (Flu) Vaccine; Shoulder
                                                             Injury Related to Vaccine
    SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND                                  Administration (SIRVA)
    HUMAN SERVICES,

                       Respondent.

Maximillian J. Muller, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA, for petitioner.
Linda Sara Renzi, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

                               DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1

Dorsey, Chief Special Master:

       On September 15, 2016, 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 alleges that she suffered left shoulder injuries following an
influenza (“flu”) vaccination she received on October 3, 2014. Petition at 1-2. The case
was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

        On February 21, 2017, a ruling on entitlement was issued, finding petitioner
entitled to compensation for her shoulder injuries. On August 8, 2017, respondent filed
a proffer on award of compensation (“Proffer”) indicating petitioner should be awarded
$125,000.00. Proffer at 1. In the Proffer, respondent represented that petitioner agrees
with the proffered award. 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1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the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 $125,000.00 in the form of a check payable to
petitioner, Bethany Ritting. 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