Court Opinion

ID: 6105041
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-20 14:02:16.784663+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:53:46.705393
License: Public Domain

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
                                 OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
                                         No. 20-1165V
                                        UNPUBLISHED

    HOLLY REYNOLDS,                                         Chief Special Master Corcoran

                        Petitioner,                         Filed: December 20, 2021
    v.
                                                            Special Processing Unit (SPU);
    SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND                                 Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;
    HUMAN SERVICES,                                         Table Injury; Tetanus Diphtheria
                                                            acellular Pertussis (Tdap) Vaccine;
                       Respondent.                          Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine
                                                            Administration (SIRVA)

Leigh Finfer, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA, for Petitioner.

Alexa Roggenkamp, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

                                   RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

       On September 9, 2020, Holly Reynolds 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 tetanus, diphtheria,
and pertussis (“Tdap”) vaccine on October 24, 2018. Petition at 1, ¶ 2. 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 ¶¶ 2, 9-11. 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  Because this unpublished Ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required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 references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. §
300aa (2012).
        On December 17, 2021, 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 indicated “it is [his] position that [P]etitioner has
satisfied the criteria set forth in the Vaccine Injury Table and Qualifications and Aids to
Interpretation for a SIRVA injury from her Tdap vaccine.” Id. at 8. Respondent further
agrees that “based on the current record, [P]etitioner has satisfied all legal prerequisites
for compensation under the Act.” 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

                                              2