Court Opinion

ID: 6215830
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-02-07 22:01:44.03551+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:57:06.094534
License: Public Domain

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
                                OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
                                        No. 20-1647V
                                       UNPUBLISHED

    JANIS GEIST,                                            Chief Special Master Corcoran

                        Petitioner,                         Filed: January 5, 2022
    v.
                                                            Special Processing Unit (SPU);
    SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND                                 Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;
    HUMAN SERVICES,                                         Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine;
                                                            Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine
                       Respondent.                          Administration (SIRVA)

Amy A. Senerth, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA, for Petitioner.

Zoe Wade, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

                                   RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1

       On November 23, 2020, Janis Geist 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”), a defined Table Injury, after receiving the influenza (“flu”)
vaccine on September 21, 2019. Petition at 1, ¶¶ 1, 11. Petitioner further alleges she
received the vaccine in the United States, that she continues to suffer the residual effects
of her SIRVA more than six months post-vaccination, and that neither she nor any other
person has filed a civil action or received compensation for her SIRVA. Petition at ¶¶ 7-
9. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

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 Because this unpublished Ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required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 ref erences to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. §
300aa (2012).
       On January 5, 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 “has concluded that [P]etitioner’s alleged injury stemming
from the flu vaccination on September 21, 2019, is consistent with SIRVA as defined by
the Vaccine Injury Table.” Id. at 3. Respondent further agrees that “[b]ased on the medical
records . . . , [P]etitioner has met the statutory requirements for entitlement to
compensation.” Id. at 3-4.

       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

                                            2