Court Opinion

ID: 4558734
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2020-08-26 13:01:34.74728+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:27:10.927608
License: Public Domain

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
                                  OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
                                          No. 19-305V
                                         UNPUBLISHED

    STACEY STEPHENS POLLOCK,                                  Chief Special Master Corcoran

                         Petitioner,                          Filed: July 22, 2020
    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)

Ronald Craig Homer, Conway, Homer, P.C., Boston, MA, for petitioner.

Traci R. Patton, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

                                     RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

        On February 26, 2019, Stacey Stephens Pollock 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 shoulder injury related
to vaccine administration (SIRVA) as a result of receiving the influenza (flu) vaccination
on October 28, 2016. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing
Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

       On July 21, 2020, 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 concluded that Petitioner’s alleged injury is consistent

1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am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.

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).
with SIRVA as defined on the Vaccine Injury Table. Id. at 4. Specifically, Respondent
found that “[P]etitioner had no history of pain, inflammation or dysfunction of the
affected shoulder prior to the vaccination; 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 . . . . Additionally, based on the medical records outlined
above, [P]etitioner suffered the residual effects of her condition for more than six
months.” Id. (citations omitted).

       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