NATHAN MATHEWS,

Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent. Chief Special Master Corcoran

Filed: July 14, 2022

Special Processing Unit (SPU) ; Rul ing on Entitlement; Concession; Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine; Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA)

Jessi Carin Huff

, Maglio Christopher & Toale, PA, Seattle, WA , for Petitioner.

Jamica Marie Littles , U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1

On January 12, 2021

, Nathan Mathews 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 he suffered a left shoulder injury related to vaccine administration ( “ SIRVA ” ) as a result of an influenza vaccine received on October 21,

2019 . Petition at 1, 3. Petitioner further alleges the vaccine was admi nistered in the Unit ed States, his injur i es have lasted more than si x months, and ne ither Pet itioner, nor any other party, has ever brough t an action or received compensation for his vaccine

- related injuries . Petition at ¶¶ 17, 19

- 20; Ex. 1

. T he case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

1 Because this unpublished R uling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in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). This means the R uling 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 wil l 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 section references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subpara graph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa (2012 ). 

# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No

. 21

- 0684 V

UNPUBLISHED2

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Brian H. Corcoran
Brian H. Corcoran
Chief Special Master On July 14, 2022

, Respondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he concedes that

P etitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report at 1. Specifically, Respondent agrees that “ petitioner had no history of pain, inflammation, or dysfunction in hi s left shoulder before his October 2019 intramuscular vaccine administration; his symptoms were limited to the left shoulder in which the intramuscular vaccine was administered; he more likely than not suffered the onset of pain within fortyeight hours o f vaccine administration; and there is no other condition or abnormality that
would explain petitioner ’ s symptoms. ” Id. at 6. Respondent further agrees that “ the records show that the case was timely filed, that the vaccine was received in the United States, and that petitioner satisfies the statutory severity requirement by suffering the
residual effects or complications of his injury for more than six months after vaccine
administration. ” Id

. at 7. Respondent also notes that Petitioner avers that neither he, nor

anyone on his behalf, has received compensation or brought an action for his vaccinerelated injuries. Id

.

In view of R espondent’ s position and th e eviden ce of record, I find that
Petitioner is entitled to compensation.