Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Thompson v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 16-956 (2018)

Court: United States Court of Federal Claims Number: 16-956 Visitors: 18
Judges: Nora Beth Dorsey
Filed: Mar. 09, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 16-956V Filed: November 1, 2017 UNPUBLISHED LEONARD SEAN THOMPSON, Special Processing Unit (SPU); Joint Petitioner, Stipulation on Damages; Influenza v. (Flu) Vaccine; Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS) SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Jeffrey S. Pop, Jeffrey S. Pop & Associates, Beverly Hills, CA, for petitioner. Juliana Gray MacPherson, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent. DECISION O
More
         In the United States Court of Federal Claims
                                 OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
                                           No. 16-956V
                                    Filed: November 1, 2017
                                         UNPUBLISHED


    LEONARD SEAN THOMPSON,
                                                             Special Processing Unit (SPU); Joint
                        Petitioner,                          Stipulation on Damages; Influenza
    v.                                                       (Flu) Vaccine; Guillain-Barre
                                                             Syndrome (GBS)
    SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND
    HUMAN SERVICES,

                       Respondent.


Jeffrey S. Pop, Jeffrey S. Pop & Associates, Beverly Hills, CA, for petitioner.
Juliana Gray MacPherson, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for
respondent.

                              DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION 1

Dorsey, Chief Special Master:

        On August 5, 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 he suffered Guillain-Barre Syndrome (“GBS”) caused by
his December 12, 2014 influenza (“flu”) vaccination. Petition at 1; Stipulation, filed
November 1, 2017, at ¶ 4. Petitioner further alleges he experienced the residual effects
of his injury for more than six months and that there has been no prior award or
settlement of a civil action for damages as a result of his condition. Petition at 4;
Stipulation at ¶¶ 4-5. “Respondent denies that the flu vaccine administered on or about
December 12, 2014, is the cause of petitioner’s alleged GBS and/or any other injury or
his current condition. ” Stipulation at ¶ 6.



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).
       Nevertheless, on November 1, 2017, the parties filed the attached joint
stipulation, stating that a decision should be entered awarding compensation. The
undersigned finds the stipulation reasonable and adopts it as the decision of the Court
in awarding damages, on the terms set forth therein.

     Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Stipulation, the undersigned
awards the following compensation:

        A lump sum of $155,000.00 in the form of a check payable to petitioner.
        Stipulation at ¶ 8. This amount represents compensation for all items of
        damages that would be available under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). 
Id. The undersigned
approves the requested amount for petitioner’s compensation.
In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, 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

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer