Flatt v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
22-0416V
Fed. Cl.
Jan 8, 2026
Check Treatment
Docket
    In the United States Court of Federal Claims
                                   OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
                                            Filed: November 6, 2025

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
MARY FLATT,                                 *
                                            *
             Petitioner,                    *     No. 22-416V
                                            *
 v.                                         *     Special Master Gowen
                                            *
SECRETARY OF HEALTH                         *
AND HUMAN SERVICES,                         *
                                            *
             Respondent.                    *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Leah V. Durant, Law Offices of Leah V. Durant, PLLC, Washington, D.C., for petitioner.
James V. Lopez, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for respondent.

                                      DECISION ON STIPULATION1

       On April 11, 2022, Mary Flatt (“petitioner”) filed her claim in the National Vaccine
Injury Compensation Program (“VICP”).2 Petition, pmbl., ECF No. 1. Petitioner alleges that the
influenza (“flu”) vaccine caused her to suffer injuries including Guillain-Barré syndrome
(“GBS”). Id.

        On November 4, 2025, respondent filed a stipulation providing that a decision should be
entered awarding compensation to petitioner. Stipulation, ECF No. 52. Respondent denies that
the flu vaccine petitioner received caused her to suffer GBS, or any other injury, or her current
condition. Id. at ¶ 6. Nevertheless, maintaining their respective positions, the parties now agree
that the issues between them settled and that a decision should be entered awarding petitioner
compensation in accordance with the stipulation attached hereto as Appendix A. Id. at ¶ 7.

1
  Pursuant to the E-Government Act of 2002, see
44 U.S.C. § 3501
 note (2012), because this decision contains a
reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required to post it to a publicly available website. This decision
will appear at https://www.govinfo.gov/app/collection/uscourts/national/cofc or on the Court of Federal Claims
website. This means the decision will be available to anyone with access to the Internet. Before the decision is
posted on the court’s website, each party has 14 days to file a motion requesting redaction “of any information
furnished by that party: (1) that is a trade secret or commercial or financial in substance and is privileged or
confidential; or (2) that includes medical files or similar files, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly
unwarranted invasion of privacy.” Vaccine Rule 18(b). “An objecting party must provide the court with a proposed
redacted version of the decision.”
Id.
 If neither party files a motion for redaction within 14 days, the decision
will be posted on the court’s website without any changes.
Id.
2
 The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program is set forth in Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine
Injury Act of 1986,
Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100
 Stat. 3755, codified as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-1 et seq. (2023)
(Vaccine Act or the Act). All citations in this decision to individual sections of the Vaccine Act are to 42 U.S.C.A. §
300aa.
        The stipulation provides:

        1) A lump sum payment of $95,000.00 to be paid through an ACH deposit to
           petitioner’s counsel’s IOLTA account for prompt disbursement to petitioner.
           This amount represents compensation for all damages that would be available under
           42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a).

       I adopt the parties’ stipulation attached hereto, and award compensation in the amount
and on the terms set forth therein. The Clerk of the Court SHALL ENTER JUDGMENT in
accordance with the terms of the parties’ stipulation.3

        IT IS SO ORDERED.

                                                                               s/Thomas L. Gowen
                                                                               Thomas L. Gowen
                                                                               Special Master




3
 Entry of judgment is expedited by each party’s filing notice renouncing the right to seek review. Vaccine Rule
11(a).

                                                         2