In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 18-1228V

UNPUBLISHED

MARY MCNALLY,

 Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES,

 Respondent.

Chief Special Master Corcoran 

Filed: January 13, 2020

Special Processing Unit (SPU); 

Damages Decision Based on Proffer; 

Influenza (Flu) Vaccine; Shoulder 

Injury Related to Vaccine 

Administration (SIRVA)

Bridget Candace McCullough, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA, for petitioner.

Althea Walker Davis, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1

On August 16, 2018, Mary McNally 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 an influenza (“flu”) vaccination administered on 

November 4, 2016. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing 

Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On January 13, 2020, a ruling on entitlement was issued, finding Petitioner 

entitled to compensation for a SIRVA. On January 8, 2020, Respondent filed a proffer 

on award of compensation (“Proffer”) indicating Petitioner should be awarded 

$71,851.19 (comprised of $70,000.00 for actual pain and suffering and $1,851.19 for 

past unreimbursable expenses). Proffer at Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report and Proffer.

 1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am 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 EGovernment 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 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 (2012).
2

In the Proffer, Respondent represented that Petitioner agrees with the proffered award. 

Id. Based on the record as a whole, I find that Petitioner is entitled to an award as 

stated in the Proffer.

Pursuant to the terms stated in the Proffer, I award Petitioner a lump sum 

payment of $$71,851.19 (comprised of $70,000.00 for actual pain and suffering 

and $1,851.19 for past unreimbursable expenses) in the form of a check payable 

to Petitioner. This amount represents compensation for all damages that would be 

available under § 15(a). 

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

decision.3

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Brian H. Corcoran

Brian H. Corcoran

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.