Filed: Mar. 31, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 31, 2016
Summary: UNPUBLISHED RULING ON ENTITLEMENT AND DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES 1 NORA BETH DORSEY , Chief Special Master . On August 26, 2015, Hans Varblow ("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" or "Program"). Petitioner alleges that due to his receipt of the influenza ("flu") vaccine on November 27, 2013, he suffered a left shoulder injury. Pet. at 2, 4-5. The case was assigned to t
Summary: UNPUBLISHED RULING ON ENTITLEMENT AND DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES 1 NORA BETH DORSEY , Chief Special Master . On August 26, 2015, Hans Varblow ("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" or "Program"). Petitioner alleges that due to his receipt of the influenza ("flu") vaccine on November 27, 2013, he suffered a left shoulder injury. Pet. at 2, 4-5. The case was assigned to th..
More
UNPUBLISHED
RULING ON ENTITLEMENT AND DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1
NORA BETH DORSEY, Chief Special Master.
On August 26, 2015, Hans Varblow ("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" or "Program"). Petitioner alleges that due to his receipt of the influenza ("flu") vaccine on November 27, 2013, he suffered a left shoulder injury. Pet. at 2, 4-5. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit ("SPU") of the Office of Special Masters.
On March 31, 2016, respondent filed her Rule 4(c) report in which she concedes that petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Resp't's Rule 4(c) Rep. and Proffer on Damages at 1. Specifically, respondent concluded that petitioner's alleged injury is consistent with shoulder injury related to vaccine administration ("SIRVA"), and that it was caused-in-fact by the flu vaccine he received on November 27, 2013. Id. at 4. Respondent further stated that she did not identify any other causes for petitioner's SIRVA, and that the records show that he has suffered the sequela of this injury for more than six months. Id. Therefore, based on the record as it now stands, petitioner has satisfied all legal prerequisites for compensation under the Act. Id.
Additionally, "[b]ased upon the evidence of record, respondent proffers that petitioner should be awarded $35,000.00, which represents all elements of compensation to which petitioner would be entitled under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a)." Id. Respondent represents that petitioner agrees with the proffered award. Id.
In view of respondent's concession and the evidence of record, the undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to compensation. Further, based on the record as a whole, the undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to an award as stated in Respondent's Rule 4(c) Report and Proffer on Damages.
Accordingly, pursuant to the terms stated in Respondent's Rule 4(c) Report and Proffer on Damages, the undersigned awards petitioner a lump sum payment of $35,000.00 in the form of a check payable to petitioner, Hans Varblow.3 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.4
IT IS SO ORDERED.
