Divakar v. Secretary of Health and Human Services ( 2015 )


Menu:
  •                     IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS
    OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
    No. 14-273V
    Filed: March 16, 2015
    (Not to be published)
    *************************
    VIJAY DIVAKAR,                           *
    *
    Petitioner,           *            Stipulation; Flu Vaccine;
    v.                                 *            Peripheral Neuropathy;
    *            Attorneys’ Fees & Costs
    SECRETARY OF HEALTH                      *
    AND HUMAN SERVICES,                      *
    *
    Respondent.           *
    ****************************
    Andrew Downing, Esq., Van Cott & Talamante, PLLC, Phoenix, AZ for petitioner.
    Claudia Ganghi, Esq., U.S. Dep’t. of Justice, Washington, DC for respondent.
    DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1
    Gowen, Special Master:
    Vijay Divaker [“petitioner”] filed a petition for compensation under the National
    Vaccine Injury Compensation Program2 on April 9, 2014. Petitioner alleges that he
    suffered from peripheral neuropathy that was caused in fact by a flu vaccination he
    received on October 15, 2013. See Stipulation, filed March 13, 2015, at ¶¶ 2, 4.
    Further, petitioner alleges that he experienced residual effects of his injuries for more
    than six months. Stipulation at ¶ 4. Respondent denies that the petitioner’s flu vaccine
    caused petitioner’s alleged peripheral neuropathy, any other injury, or his current
    disability. Stipulation at ¶ 6.
    1
    Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I intend
    to post this decision on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, in accordance with the E-
    Government Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-347, § 205, 116 Stat. 2899, 2913 (codified as amended at 44
    U.S.C. § 3501 note (2006)). In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), a party has 14 days to identify and
    move to delete medical or other information, that satisfies the criteria in 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-12(d)(4)(B).
    Further, consistent with the rule requirement, a motion for redaction must include a proposed redacted
    decision. If, upon review, I agree that the identified material fits within the requirements of that provision, I
    will delete 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 (2006).
    Nevertheless, the parties have agreed to settle the case. On March 13, 2015,
    the parties filed a joint stipulation agreeing to settle this case and describing the
    settlement terms.
    Respondent agrees to pay petitioner:
    a. A lump sum of $142,500.00 in the form of a check payable to petitioner,
    Vijay Divaker. This amount represents compensation for all damages that
    would be available under § 300aa-15(a); and
    b. A lump sum of $20,633.01 in the form of a check payable jointly to
    petitioner and petitioner’s attorney, Andrew D. Downing Esq., for
    attorneys’ fees and costs available under § 300aa-15(e); and, in
    compliance with General Order #9, no out-of-pocket expenses were incurred
    by petitioner in proceeding on the petition.
    The special master adopts the parties’ stipulation attached hereto, and awards
    compensation in the amount and on the terms set forth therein. The clerk of the court is
    directed to enter judgment in accordance with this decision.3
    IT IS SO ORDERED.
    s/ Thomas L. Gowen
    Thomas L. Gowen
    Special Master
    3
    Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment can be expedited by each party filing a notice
    renouncing the right to seek review.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 14-273

Judges: Thomas L. Gowen

Filed Date: 4/6/2015

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/7/2015