NORA BETH DORSEY, Chief Special Master.
On September 7, 2017, petitioner filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq.,
On August 6, 2018, a ruling on entitlement was issued, finding petitioner entitled to compensation for his GBS injury. On October 12, 2018, respondent filed a proffer on award of compensation ("Proffer") indicating petitioner should be awarded $152,417.48, including $150,000.00 in actual and projected pain and suffering and $2,417.48 in past unreimbursable expenses. Proffer at 1-2. 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.
Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Proffer,
The clerk of the court is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this decision.
On September 7, 2017, Michael Napolitano ("petitioner") filed a petition for compensation ("Petition") under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 to -34 ("Vaccine Act" or "Act"), as amended. Respondent conceded petitioner's entitlement to compensation in his Rule 4(c) Report filed on August 3, 2018. Based on Respondent's Rule 4(c) Report the Chief Special Master found petitioner entitled to compensation.
Respondent proffers that petitioner should be awarded $150,000.00 in actual and projected pain and suffering. This amount reflects that any award for projected pain and suffering has been reduced to net present value. See 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a)(4). Petitioner agrees.
Evidence supplied by petitioner documents his expenditure of past unreimbursable expenses related to his vaccine-related injury. Respondent proffers that petitioner should be awarded past unreimbursable expenses in the amount of $2,417.48. Petitioner agrees.
Respondent recommends that the compensation provided to petitioner should be made through a lump sum payment of
Petitioner is a competent adult. Evidence of guardianship is not required in this case.