BRIAN H. CORCORAN, Special Master.
On July 6, 2017, Marie Schmidt filed a petition seeking compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.
On March 30, 2018, Respondent filed his Rule 4(c) Report, in which he acknowledged that, based on her claim of GBS following the flu vaccine, Petitioner has satisfied the requirements for a Vaccine Injury Table claim and is entitled to compensation. ECF No. 17 at 5. I subsequently issued a ruling finding entitlement (ECF No. 18, dated April 2, 2018) and an Order directing the parties to confer regarding an appropriate damages award (ECF No. 19, dated April 2, 2018).
After more than a year of damages negotiations, Respondent filed a proffer proposing an award of compensation. ECF No. 29. I have reviewed the file, and based upon that review, I conclude that Respondent's Proffer (as attached hereto) is reasonable. I therefore adopt it as my decision in awarding damages on the terms set forth therein.
The Proffer proposes:
Proffer at 1. These amounts represent compensation for all elements of compensation under Vaccine Act Section 15(a) to which Petitioner is entitled.
I approve a Vaccine Program award in the requested amount set forth above to be made to Petitioner. In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment herewith.
On March 30, 2018, respondent filed her Rule 4(c) Report, in which she conceded entitlement. On April 2, 2018, the Court issued a Ruling on Entitlement, finding that petitioner is entitled to compensation for her Guillain-Barre Syndrome. Based on the evidence in the record, respondent proffers that petitioner receive an award of a lump sum of $137,610.48 (consisting of $135,000.00 in pain and suffering and $2,610.48 in past out-of-pocket expenses) in the form of a check payable to petitioner. This amount represents compensation for all elements of compensation under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a) to which petitioner is entitled.
Petitioner is a competent adult. Evidence of guardianship is not required in this case.