Martinez v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

Opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS Filed: April 6, 2026

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * MICHAEL MARTINEZ, * * Petitioner, * No. 25-304V * v. * Special Master Young * SECRETARY OF HEALTH * AND HUMAN SERVICES, * * Respondent. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Ronald Craig Homer, Conway, Homer, P.C., Boston, MA, for Petitioner. Jay Travis Williamson, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

DECISION1

On February 20, 2025, Michael Martinez (“Petitioner”) filed a petition for compensation pursuant to the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.2 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-10 to -34 (2018). Petitioner alleged that as a result of receiving a tetanus-diphtheria-acellular-pertussis (“Tdap”) vaccine on September 6, 2022, he suffered Guillain-Barré syndrome (“GBS”). Pet., ECF No. 1.

On April 6, 2026, the parties filed a stipulation (attached as Appendix A)3 in which they state that a decision should be entered awarding compensation to Petitioner. Stipulation ¶ 7, ECF No. 27. Respondent “denies that [P]etitioner sustained a GBS injury; denies that the Tdap vaccine caused [P]etitioner’s alleged GBS, or any other injury; and denies that [P]etitioner’s current condition is a sequelae of a vaccine-related injury.” Id. ¶ 6. Nevertheless, the parties agree to the joint stipulation. See id. ¶ 7. I find the stipulation reasonable and adopt it as the decision of the

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), 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. 3 The attached stipulation omits the e-sign document audit to avoid unnecessary disclosure of Petitioner’s personal information. Court in awarding damages, on the terms set forth therein.

The parties stipulate that Petitioner shall receive the following compensation:

(a) A lump sum of $25,000.00 to be paid through an ACH deposit to Petitioner’s counsel’s IOLTA account for prompt disbursement to Petitioner.

Id. ¶ 8. This amount represents compensation for all damages that would be available under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a).

I approve the requested amount for Petitioner’s compensation. Accordingly, an award should be made consistent with the stipulation.

In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the Clerk of Court SHALL ENTER JUDGMENT in accordance with the terms of the parties’ stipulation.4

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Herbrina D.S. Young Herbrina D.S. Young Special Master

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