Court Opinion

ID: 4580912
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2020-10-27 16:04:21.586648+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:47:58.030215
License: Public Domain

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
                                 OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
                                         No. 19-0745V
                                        UNPUBLISHED

    RENEE SMITH,                                            Chief Special Master Corcoran

                        Petitioner,                         Filed: September 23, 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)

Bridget Candace McCullough, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA, for petitioner.

Mallori Browne Openchowski, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for
respondent.

                                   RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

       On May 20, 2019, Renee Smith 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 which meets the Table definition of SIRVA and was caused in fact by the
influenza vaccine she received on September 22, 2017. Petition at 1, ¶ 2. Petitioner
further alleges she received the vaccine in the United States, that she suffered the
residual effects of her SIRVA for more than six months, and that neither she nor any other
party has filed a civil action or received compensation for her injuries, alleged as vaccine
caused. Petition at ¶¶ 2, 25-26. 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  Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required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 “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa
(2012).
       On September 23, 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 “believes that petitioner’s alleged injury is
consistent with SIRVA, as defined on the Vaccine Injury Table.” Id. at 4. Respondent
further agrees “that based on the record as it now stands, petitioner has satisfied all legal
prerequisites for compensation under the Act.” Id. at 5.

       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