# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 19

- 1335 V

UNPUBLISHED

DEBRA LAMBE RT

,

Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent. Chief Special Master Corcoran

Filed: March 10, 2021

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

Jeffrey S. Pop, Jeffrey S. Pop & Associates, Beverly Hills, CA , for P etitioner.

Catherine Elizabeth Stolar , U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for

R espondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1

On August 30, 2019

, Debra Lambert 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 left shoulder injury related to vaccine

administration ( “ SIRVA ” ) as a result of an influenza vaccine received on Oc tober 16,

2018 . Petit ion at 1 . The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On March 9, 2021

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

P etitioner is entitled to compensa tion in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report at 1. Specifically, R espondent agrees that “ petitioner ’ s claim meets the Table c riteria for

1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in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 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 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 section references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subpara graph of 42 U.S.C.
§ 300aa (2012 ).2

SIRVA. Specifically, petition er had no history of pain, infl ammation, or dysfunction of the

affected shoulder prior to her vaccin ation that would explain the alleged symptoms and examination findings occurring after vaccine injection; she more likely than not suffered the onset of pain within for ty

- eight hours of vaccine admini stration; her pain and re duce d range of motion were limited to the shoulder in which the vaccine wa s administered; and

there i s no other condition or abnormality that wo uld e xplain petitioner ’ s symptoms

. ” Id.

at 6 . Respondent further agrees that “ th is case was timely filed, that p etitioner received

her vaccin ation in the United States, and that p etitioner satisfies the statutory severity requirem ent by suffering the residual eff ects o r c omplications of her injury for more than

six months after vaccine ad ministration

. ” Id . at 7.

In view of R espondent’s position and the evidence of record, I find that

P etitioner is entitle d to compensation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Brian H. Corcoran

Brian H. Corcoran

Chief Special Master