Gov’t Mem. at-33-34 (quoting Ruling at 54). 3. The Court’s Resolution. a. The Constitutional Issue. As a threshold matter, the Vaccine Act is constitutional, because the Vaccine Act categorically does not deny access to Article III courts. In fact, Petitioners may appeal this decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. See 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-12(f) (“[A]ny petitioner aggrieved by the findings or conclusions of the [United States Court of Federal Claims] may obtain review of the judgment of the court in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Cireuit[.]”). In addition, Petitioners have misread Stem’s holding that Article I bankruptcy courts do not have jurisdiction oyer common law claims between private parties. See Stern, 131 S.Ct. at 2614-15 (<HOLDING>). The claims in this case, are alleged against
recognizing that the claim at issue was one under state common law between two private parties the experts in the federal system at resolving common law counterclaims  are the article iii courts holding that the statute in question served to modify prior common law and that the legislature was empowered to make such changes in the common law based on the public interest recognizing common law privileges holding that article 2 of the ucc preempts common law claims holding that federal courts may not consider other issues before resolving standing an article iii jurisdictional matter