^[1] Roth , Special Master: On April 5, 2018, Brianna Davies [“Ms. Davies” or “petitioner”] ^[2] filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. ^[3] Petitioner alleges that she suffered from uveitis after receiving a human papillomavirus (“HPV”) vaccine on April 11, *2 2016. Stipulation filed July 13, 2021, at ¶¶ 1-4. Respondent denies that the immunization caused petitioner’s injury. Stipulation at ¶ 6.

Nevertheless, the parties have agreed to settle the case. On July 13, 2021, the parties filed a joint stipulation agreeing to settle this case and describing the settlement terms. Respondent agrees to issue the following payments:

A lump sum of $97,975.40 in the form of a check payable to petitioner, Brianna Davies; this sum represents $95,000.00 for pain and suffering and $2,975.40 for first year life care expenses. A lump sum of $6,994.21, in the form of check payable jointly to petitioner and her parents, Matthew and Joan Davies, to be endorsed to Matthew and Joan Davies; this sum represents past unreimbursable expenses. An amount sufficient to purchase the annuity contract described in paragraph 10 of the signed Stipulation, paid to the life insurance company from which the annuity will be purchased. These amounts represent compensation for all damages that would be available under § 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 is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this decision. ^[4]

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Mindy Michaels Roth Mindy Michaels Roth Special Master

NOTES

[1] Although this Decision has been formally designated “unpublished,” it will nevertheless be posted on the Court of Federal Claims’ website, in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-347, 116 Stat. 2899, 2913 (codified as amended at 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2006)). This means the Decision will be available to anyone with access to the internet. However, the parties may object to the Decision’s inclusion of certain kinds of confidential information. Specifically, under Vaccine Rule 18(b), each party has fourteen days within which to request 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). Otherwise, the whole Decision will be available to the public. Id .

[2] The matter was originally filed by petitioner’s parents, Matthew Davies and Joan Davies, as Brianna Davies was a minor. During the pendency of this case, Brianna Davies reached the age of majority and was properly substituted as petitioner.

[3] 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). 1

[4] Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment can be expedited by each party filing a notice renouncing the right to seek review. 2