Court Opinion

ID: 4095042
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2016-11-02 20:02:54.137699+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:09:34.165248
License: Public Domain

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
                                 OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
                                          No. 16-255V
                                     Filed: August 26, 2016
                                         UNPUBLISHED

****************************
CHERYL BOURGERIE,                         *
                                          *
                     Petitioner,          *     Damages Decision Based on Proffer;
v.                                        *     Influenza (“Flu”) Vaccination; Shoulder
                                          *     Injury Related to Vaccine Administration
SECRETARY OF HEALTH                       *     (“SIRVA”); Special Processing Unit
AND HUMAN SERVICES,                       *     (“SPU”)
                                          *
                     Respondent.          *
                                          *
****************************
Jeffrey S. Pop, Jeffrey S. Pop, Attorney at Law, Beverly Hills, CA, for petitioner.
Kelly Heidrich, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

                               DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES 1

Dorsey, Chief Special Master:

       On February 23, 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 her September 23, 2014 influenza (“flu”)
vaccination caused her to suffer Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration
(“SIRVA”). Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the
Office of Special Masters.

       On August 26, 2016, a ruling on entitlement was issued, finding petitioner entitled
to compensation for SIRVA. On August 25, 2016, respondent filed a Rule 4(c) Report
which included a proffer on award of compensation (“Proffer”) indicating that petitioner
should be awarded $35,151.00. Respondent’s Report and Proffer on Damages at 3. In
the Proffer, respondent represented that petitioner agrees with the proffered award.

1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the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).
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 stated in the Proffer, the undersigned awards petitioner
a lump sum payment of $35,151.00 in the form of a check payable to petitioner,
Cheryl Bourgerie. 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