In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 16-0135V 

Filed: September 23, 2016

Unpublished

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

SHEILA ADAMS, * 

 * 

 Petitioner, * Damages Decision Based on Proffer;

v. * Tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis

 * (“Tdap”) Vaccine; Shoulder Injury

SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Related to Vaccine Administration

AND HUMAN SERVICES, * (“SIRVA”); Special Processing Unit

 * (“SPU”)

 Respondent. * 

 * 

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

John Judson Patterson, Luxon, Patterson & Himes, PLLC, Richmond, KY, for petitioner.

Adriana R. Teitel, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1

Dorsey, Chief Special Master:

On January 27, 2016, Sheila Adams (“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” or “Program”). Petitioner alleged that she 

suffered “brachial neuritis including adhesive capsulitis and left scapular dyskinesis” as 

a result of receiving a tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis (“Tdap”) vaccine on 

February 2, 2014. Petition at ¶ 7. The case was assigned to the Special Processing 

Unit (“SPU”) of the Office of Special Masters.

On August 31, 2016, the undersigned issued a ruling on entitlement finding 

petitioner entitled to compensation for a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration 

(“SIRVA”). On September 23, 2016, respondent filed a proffer on award of 

compensation (“Proffer”) indicating petitioner should be awarded $108,000.00. Proffer 

 

1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the 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).
2

at 1. In the Proffer, respondent represented that petitioner agrees with the proffered 

award. Id. Based on the record as a whole, the undersigned finds that petitioner is 

entitled to an award as stated in the Proffer.

Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Proffer, the undersigned awards 

petitioner a lump sum payment of $108,000.00 in the form of a check payable to 

petitioner, Sheila Adams. This amount represents compensation for all damages that 

would be available under § 300aa-15(a). 

The clerk of the court is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this 

decision.3 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 s/Nora Beth Dorsey

Nora Beth Dorsey

Chief Special Master

 

3 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment can be expedited by the parties’ joint filing of notice 

renouncing the right to seek review.
1 

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

SHEILA ADAMS,

 

 Petitioner, 

 v. 

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES, 

 

 Respondent. 

 

 No. 16-135V 

 Chief Special Master Dorsey

 ECF

 

RESPONDENT’S PROFFER ON AWARD OF COMPENSATION

I. Compensation for Vaccine Injury-Related Items

On August 29, 2016, respondent filed a Rule 4(c) Report conceding that petitioner is

entitled to vaccine compensation for her Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration 

(“SIRVA”) injury. On August 31, 2016, the Chief Special Master issued a Ruling on 

Entitlement adopting respondent’s recommendation. 

 Respondent proffers that based on the evidence of record, petitioner should be awarded 

$108,000.00. This amount represents all elements of compensation to which petitioner would be 

entitled under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). Petitioner agrees. 

II. Form of the Award

 Respondent recommends that the compensation provided to petitioner should be made 

through a lump sum payment as described below, and requests that the special master’s decision 

and the Court’s judgment award the following:1

 

1 Should petitioner die prior to entry of judgment, respondent reserves the right to move the Court for appropriate 

relief. In particular, respondent would oppose any award for future medical expenses, future pain and suffering, and 

future lost wages. 
2 

A lump sum payment of $108,000.00 in the form of a check payable to petitioner, 

Sheila Adams. This amount accounts for all elements of compensation under 42 

U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a) to which petitioner would be entitled. 

Petitioner is a competent adult. Evidence of guardianship is not required in this case. 

 Respectfully submitted, 

BENJAMIN C. MIZER

 Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General

 C. SALVATORE D’ALESSIO 

Acting Director

 Torts Branch, Civil Division 

CATHARINE E. REEVES

Acting Deputy Director 

Torts Branch, Civil Division 

VORIS E. JOHNSON, JR.

Senior Trial Attorney

 Torts Branch, Civil Division 

/s/ Adriana Teitel 

ADRIANA TEITEL

Trial Attorney

 Torts Branch, Civil Division 

 U.S. Department of Justice 

 P.O. Box 146, Benjamin Franklin Station 

 Washington, DC 20044-0146 

 Tel: (202) 616-3677 

 

Dated: September 23, 2016