Court Opinion

ID: 6325103
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-03-21 13:02:08.188953+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:17:19.507123
License: Public Domain

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
                                 OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
                                         No. 20-0642V
                                        UNPUBLISHED

    RICHARD IACONELLI,                                      Chief Special Master Corcoran

                        Petitioner,                         Filed: February 14, 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)

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  Because this unpublished Ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required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).
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

                                             2