In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS 

No. 17-0670V 

 Filed: January 11, 2018 

UNPUBLISHED 

CHRISTINE PEARSON, 

 Petitioner, 

v. 

SECRETARY OF HEALTH 

AND HUMAN SERVICES, 

 Respondent. 

Special Processing Unit (SPU); 

Ruling on Entitlement; Concession; 

Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine; 

Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine 

Administration (SIRVA) 

   

Cliff John Shoemaker, Shoemaker, Gentry & Knickelbein, Vienna, VA, for petitioner. 

Douglas Ross, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent. 

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

Dorsey, Chief Special Master: 

 On May 22, 2017, Christine Pearson (“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”). Petitioner alleges that she suffered a shoulder 

injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) as a result of an influenza (“flu”) 

vaccine she received on October 13, 2016. Petition at 1-2. The case was assigned to 

the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters. 

On January 11, 2018, respondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he concedes 

that petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report 

at 1. Specifically, respondent states that petitioner’s claim meets the Table criteria for 

SIRVA Id. at 4. Petitioner had no history of pain, inflammation or dysfunction of the 

                                                            

1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the 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). 
affected shoulder prior to intramuscular vaccine administration that would explain the 

alleged signs, symptoms, examination findings, and/or diagnostic studies occurring after 

vaccine administration; her pain and reduced range of motion were limited to the 

shoulder in which the intramuscular vaccine was administered; and there is no other 

condition or abnormality present that would explain petitioner’s symptoms. Id. at 4-5. 

Respondent further agrees that “the records show that the case was timely filed, that 

the vaccine was received in the United States, and that petitioner satisfies the statutory 

requirement by suffering the residual effects of complications of her injury for more than 

six months after vaccine administration.” Id. at 5. Thus, respondent concedes that 

entitlement to compensation is appropriate under the terms of the Vaccine Act. Id. 

 In view of respondent’s position and the evidence of record, the 

undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to compensation. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

 s/Nora Beth Dorsey 

 Nora Beth Dorsey 

 Chief Special Master