Opinion

Bossenbroek v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

Court
United States Court of Federal Claims
Filed
Jul 10, 2024
Status
Published
On the bench
Christian J. Moran
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

*************************

CHELSEA BOSSENBROEK, *

* No. 17-122V

Petitioner, * Special Master Christian J. Moran

v. *

*

SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Filed: June 18, 2024

AND HUMAN SERVICES, *

*

Respondent. *

*************************

Leah VaSahnja Durant, Law Offices of Leah V. Durant, PLLC, Washington, DC, for Petitioner;

Mallori Browne Openchowski, United States Dep’t of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

UNPUBLISHED DECISION 1

On June 17, 2024, the parties filed a joint stipulation concerning the petition for

compensation filed by Chelsea Bossenbroek on January 27, 2017. This stipulation is adopted as

reasonable.

Petitioner alleged that the influenza vaccine she received on or about October 22, 2015,

which is contained in the Vaccine Injury Table (the “Table”), 42 C.F.R. §100.3(a), caused her to

suffer from a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”). On April 16, 2019,

the undersigned issued a Ruling on Entitlement, concluding that petitioner is entitled to

compensation. 2 Petitioner was awarded compensation. Decision, 2020 WL 2510454, issued

Apr. 3, 2020.

Petitioner challenged the amount of compensation awarded by filing a motion for review.

The Court found an error, which required remand. Opinion and Order, 169 Fed. Cl. 418 (2024).

1

Because this Decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action taken in this case,

it must be made publicly accessible and will be posted on the United States Court of Federal

Claims' website, and/or at https://www.govinfo.gov/app/collection/uscourts/national/cofc, in

accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2018) (Federal

Management and Promotion of Electronic Government Services). This means the Decision will

be available to anyone with access to the internet. In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), the

parties have 14 days to identify and move to redact medical or other information, the disclosure

of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. Any changes will appear in the

document posted on the website.

2

In the joint stipulation, Respondent maintains his contrary position, but will not seek

review of the decision memorializing entitlement.

Upon remand, the parties resolved the remaining disputes. Petitioner represents that there

has been no prior award or settlement of a civil action for damages on her behalf as a result of

her condition.

The parties agree to the joint stipulation, attached hereto. The undersigned finds said

stipulation reasonable and adopts it as the decision of the Court in awarding damages, on the

terms set forth therein.

Damages awarded in that stipulation include:

A lump sum of $66,209.30 in the form of a check payable to petitioner. This amount

represents compensation for all damages that would be available under 42 U.S.C.

§ 300aa-15(a).

In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC, Appendix B, the clerk is

directed to enter judgment according to this decision and the attached stipulation. 3 The clerk is

further directed to inform the Court about this decision. See Vaccine Rule 28.1(a).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Christian J. Moran

Christian J. Moran

Special Master

3

Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties can expedite entry of judgment by each

party filing a notice renouncing the right to seek review by a United States Court of Federal

Claims judge.

2

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.