# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 14

- 1220 V

Filed: March 10 , 201 5

N ot for Publication

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

BRANDY ROJAS *

*

Petitioner, * Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;

* Trivalent Influenza Vaccine

v. * (“flu” ) ; Shoulder Injury Related to

* Vaccine Administration (“SIRVA”) ;

* Special Processing Unit (“SPU”)

SECRETARY OF HEALTH *

AND HUMAN SERVICES, *

*

Respondent. *

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Samantha P. Travis, Kalispell, MT

, for petitioner.

Alexis Babcock , U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1

Vowell

, Chief Special Master:

On December 22 , 2014

, Brandy Rojas filed a petition for compensation under the

National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa

- 10, et seq

, 2 [ the

“Vaccine Act” or “Program”]. The petition alleges that as a result of a trivalent influenza

(“ flu ”) vaccination on October 29, 2013

, petitioner suffered cause

- in

- fact injuries to her

left shoulder including Complex Regional Pain Syndrome ( “ CRPS ” ) and Myofasical Pain

Syndrome. Petition at 1

. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the

Office of Special Masters.

On M arch 6, 2015 respondent filed her Rule 4(c) Report [“Respondent’s Report”],

in which she concedes that petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case for a

1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, it will be

posted on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, in accordance with the E

- Government Act

of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107

- 347, § 205, 116 Stat. 2899, 2913 (codified as amended at 44 U.S.C. § 3501

note (2006)) . In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), pe titioner 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. Hereinafter, for

ease of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. §

300aa (2 006).Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration ( “ SIRVA ” ) . Respondent’s Report at

5 . Specifically, respondent submits that “ Ms. Rojas suffered a Shoulder Injury Related

to Vaccine Administra tion, a non

- Table injury, and that the preponderance of the

medical evidence indicates that the injury was causally related to the vaccination.

Therefore, compensation is appropriate. ” 3 Id.

In view of respondent’s concession and the evidence before me, I find that

petitioner is entitle d to compensation

.

s/Denise K. Vowe ll

Denise K. Vowell

Chief Special Master

3 Respondent does not concede that p etitioner suffered from CRPS as a result of her vaccinatio n as alleged in the

petition

. See

, Respondents Report , p. 5, fn. 4. Nonetheless, r espondent indicated i n her report that petit ioner ’ s

symptoms alleged to be CRPS are consistent with the conceded SIRVA injury and are considered to be part of that

injury . ( Id .) Pe titioner has reserved the right to argue the validity of petitioner ’ s CRPS diagnosis during the

damages phase should it become an issue with regard to determining the amount of damages in this case

. Respondent has consented to that reservation of rights.