In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS 

No. 20-0642V 

UNPUBLISHED 

RICHARD IACONELLI, 

 Petitioner, 

v. 

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES, 

 Respondent. 

Chief Special Master Corcoran 

Filed: February 14, 2022 

Special Processing Unit (SPU); 

Ruling on Entitlement; Concession; 

Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine; 

Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine 

Administration (SIRVA) 

 

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

Matthew Murphy, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. 

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

 On May 26, 2020, Richard Iaconelli 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 he suffered from a left shoulder injury related to 

vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) as a result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccine administered 

on September 14, 2017. Petition at 1. Petitioner further alleges that his symptoms lasted 

for more than six months. Petition at 6. The case was assigned to the Special Processing 

Unit of the Office of Special Masters. 

 On February 14, 2022, 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 had no history of pain, inflammation, or 

1 Because this unpublished Ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required 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 subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 

300aa (2012). 
2

dysfunction of his left shoulder; pain occurred within 48 hours after receipt of an 

intramuscular vaccination; pain was limited to the shoulder in which the vaccine was 

administered; and no other condition or abnormality has been identified to explain 

petitioner’s shoulder pain.” Id. at 6. Respondent further agrees that “the records show that 

petitioner timely filed his case, that he received the flu vaccine in the United States, and 

that he satisfies the statutory severity requirement by suffering the residual effects or 

complications of his injury for more than six months after vaccine administration”. Id. 

 In view of Respondent’s position and 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