Court Opinion

ID: 4037177
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2016-09-26 20:02:43.490463+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:29:51.056305
License: Public Domain

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
                                 OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
                                         No. 15-0544V
                                    Filed: January 21, 2016
                                        UNPUBLISHED

****************************
DIANE M. SPHAR,                        *
                                       *
                   Petitioner,         *      Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;
                                       *      Influenza (“Flu”) Vaccine; Radial Nerve
                                       *      Injury; Special Processing Unit (“SPU”)
SECRETARY OF HEALTH                    *
AND HUMAN SERVICES,                    *
                                       *
                   Respondent.         *
                                       *
****************************
Wesly Matthew Nakajima, OConnor Acciani and Levy, LPA, Cincinnati, OH, for
petitioner.
Linda Sara Renzi, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

                                    RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

Dorsey, Chief Special Master:

       On May 28, 2015, Diane Sphar 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 radial nerve injury in her right arm
as a result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccine she received on November 18, 2013. Petition
at 2. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special
Masters.

        On January 21, 2016, 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 1. Specifically, respondent states that based on the current record,
petitioner has satisfied all legal prerequisites for compensation under the Act. Id. at 4.

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  Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the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, 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, 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).
     In view of respondent’s concession and the evidence before me, the
undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to compensation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

                              s/Nora Beth Dorsey
                              Nora Beth Dorsey
                              Chief Special Master

                                       2