     In the United States Court of Federal Claims
                                  OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
                                          No. 18-1913V
                                         UNPUBLISHED


    TINA M. DILBECK,                                          Chief Special Master Corcoran

                         Petitioner,                          Filed: June 9, 2020
    v.

    SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND                                   Special Processing Unit (SPU); Joint
    HUMAN SERVICES,                                           Stipulation on Damages; Influenza
                                                              (Flu) Vaccine; Shoulder Injury
                        Respondent.                           Related to Vaccine Administration
                                                              (SIRVA)


Jimmy A. Zgheib, Zgheib Sayad, P.C., White Plains, NY, for petitioner.

Lisa Ann Watts, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.


                               DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION 1

       On December 13, 2018, Tina Dilbeck filed a petition for compensation under the
National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq., 2 (the
“Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleges that she suffered a Shoulder Injury Related to
Vaccine Administration (SIRVA) as a result of her December 20, 2017 influneza (“flu”)
vaccination. Petition at 1; Stipulation, filed June 3, 2020, at ¶¶ 2, 4. Petitioner further
alleges that the vaccine was administered within the United States, that she suffered the
residual effects of her injury for more than six months, and that there has been no prior
award or settlement of a civil action on her behalf as a result of her injury. Stipulation at
¶¶ 3-5; see Petition at ¶¶4, 23-25. “Respondent denies that petitioner suffered a SIRVA
Table injury; denies that the flu vaccine caused petitioner’s alleged shoulder injury, or
any other injury; and further denies that petitioner’s current disabilities are sequelae of a
vaccine-related injury.” Stipulation at ¶ 6.

1
  Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am
required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in accordance with the E-
Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (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), Petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to
redact medical or other information, the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of
privacy. If, upon review, I agree that the identified material fits within this definition, I will redact such
material from public access.
2
 National 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 (2012).
       Nevertheless, on June 3, 2020, the parties filed the attached joint stipulation,
stating that a decision should be entered awarding compensation. I find the stipulation
reasonable and adopt it as my decision awarding damages, on the terms set forth
therein.

     Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Stipulation, I award the following
compensation:

        A lump sum of $71,280.50 in the form of a check payable to Petitioner.
        Stipulation at ¶ 8. This amount represents compensation for all items of
        damages that would be available under § 15(a). Id.

       I approve the requested amount for Petitioner’s compensation. In the absence of
a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the clerk of the court is directed
to enter judgment in accordance with this decision. 3

IT IS SO ORDERED.


                                          s/Brian H. Corcoran
                                          Brian H. Corcoran
                                          Chief Special Master




3
  Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment can be expedited by the parties’ joint filing of notice
renouncing the right to seek review.

                                                      2
