In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS 

No. 16-322V 

 Filed: July 21, 2017 

UNPUBLISHED 

DIANE CHANDLER, 

 Petitioner, 

v. 

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES, 

 Respondent. 

Special Processing Unit (SPU); 

Ruling on Entitlement; Concession; 

Causation-In-Fact; Influenza (Flu) 

Vaccine; Shoulder Injury Related to 

Vaccine Administration (SIRVA) 

   

Ronald Craig Homer, Conway, Homer, P.C., Boston, MA, for petitioner. 

Robert Paul Coleman, III, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent. 

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

Dorsey, Chief Special Master: 

 On March 14, 2016, petitioner 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 September 24, 2014 influenza (“flu”) 

vaccination. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the 

Office of Special Masters. 

On July 20, 2017, respondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he concedes that 

petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report at 1. 

                                                            

1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the 

undersigned intends 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). 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, the undersigned agrees that the identified material fits 

within this definition, the undersigned 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). 
 Specifically, respondent indicates that 

DICP opines that petitioner’s alleged injury is consistent with a shoulder 

injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”). DICP further agrees 

that petitioner’s SIRVA was caused-in-fact by the influenza vaccination 

administered in her right arm on September 24, 2014. No other causes for 

petitioner’s SIRVA were identified. See 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-13(a)(1)(B). In 

addition, given the medical records outlined above, the statutory six month 

sequela requirement has been satisfied. See id. at § 300aa-11(c)(1)(D)(i). 

The Petition states that petitioner has never received any compensation in 

the form of an award or settlement in connection with the vaccine-related 

injury. See 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-11(a)(5) and 300aa-11(c)(1)(E). 

Therefore, based on the current record, petitioner has satisfied all legal 

prerequisites for compensation under the Act. 

Id. at 4. 

 In view of respondent’s position and the evidence of record, the 

undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to compensation. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

 s/Nora Beth Dorsey 

 Nora Beth Dorsey 

 Chief Special Master