# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 18-0527V

UNPUBLISHED

MICHAEL JOSEPH DEUTSCH,

Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent. Chief Special Master Corcoran

Filed: December 1, 2021

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

Maximillian J. Muller, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA, for Petitioner.

Camille Michelle Collett, U.S. Department of Justice, Wash ington, DC, for Respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1

On April 10, 2018, Michael Deutsch f iled a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensati on Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq. 2 (the “Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleges that he su ffered shoulder pain and other symptoms that were “caused in fact by the influenza vaccinati on” that he received on December 1, 2016.
Petition at 1-2. Petitioner furt her alleges that he suffered the residual effects of his injury

for more than six mont hs. Petition at 2. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On November 29, 2021, Respondent filed his Amended Rule 4(c) report in which

he concedes that Petitioner is entitled to co mpensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report at 1. Specifically, Respondent st ated that “[i]n light of the Chief Special

1 Because this unpublished Ruling contains a reasoned ex planation for the action in this case, I am required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims ' website in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 Ruling 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 cons titute 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 section references to the Vaccine Ac t will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa (2012).2 Masters Findings of Fact, and medical records evidence submitted in this case, DICP has concluded that petitioner su ffered a SIRVA as defined by the Vaccine Injury Table”. Id. at 6. Respondent further agr ees that “petitioner had no recent history of pain, inflammation, or dysfunction of his left shoulder; the onset of pain occurred within 48 hours after receipt

of an intramuscular vaccinatio n; the pain was limited to the shoulder in which the vaccine was administered; and, no other condition or abnormality, such as brachial neuritis, has been identified to explain petit ioner’s left shoulder pain.” Id. Respondent further states that petitioner suffered the re sidual effects of his condition for more than six months and Respondent does not dispute t hat Petitioner has satisfied all legal prerequisites for compensation under the Act.

In view of Respondent’s position a nd the evidence of record, I find that Petitioner is entitled to compensation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Brian H. Corcoran

Brian H. Corcoran Chief Special Master