Court Opinion

ID: 4036543
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2016-09-23 12:02:50.442847+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:49:53.234450
License: Public Domain

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
                                  OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
                                           No. 15-349V
                                      Filed: August 20, 2015
                                           Unpublished

****************************
ARIKA BROWNE,                         *
                                      *
                  Petitioner,         *      Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;
                                      *      Influenza; Shoulder Injury (“SIRVA”)
                                      *      Special Processing Unit (“SPU”)
SECRETARY OF HEALTH                   *
AND HUMAN SERVICES,                   *
                                      *
                  Respondent.         *
                                      *
****************************
Andrew Downing, Van Cott & Talamante, PLLC, Phoenix, AZ, for petitioner.
Claudia Barnes Gangi, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

                                    RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1

Vowell, Chief Special Master:

       On April 7, 2015, Arika Browne 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 alleges that she suffered a left shoulder injury as
a result of the administration of an influenza vaccine. Petition at 1. The case was
assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

       On August 20, 2015, respondent filed her Rule 4(c) report in which she concedes
that petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report
at 3. Specifically, respondent states that “DICP concludes that petitioner suffered a
SIRVA injury and that the preponderance of the medical evidence indicates that the
injury was causally related to the flu vaccination she received on September 15, 2014.”

1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I intend to
post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, in accordance with the E-Government Act
of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-347, § 205, 116 Stat. 2899, 2913 (codified as amended at 44 U.S.C. § 3501
note (2006)). 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.

2National 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).
Id. at 3. Respondent further agrees that petitioner met the statutory requirements by
suffering her condition for more than six months. Id.

       In view of respondent’s concession and the evidence before me, I find that
petitioner is entitled to compensation.

                                  s/Denise K. Vowell
                                  Denise K. Vowell
                                  Chief Special Master