# Bossenbroek v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

> United States Court of Federal Claims · July 10, 2024

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10734798

## Case

- **Court:** United States Court of Federal Claims
- **Decided:** July 10, 2024
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Judges:** Christian J. Moran
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10734798

## Opinion text

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UNPUBLISHED DECISION 1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

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10734798. Public record. Not legal advice.