Court Opinion

ID: 4672971
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2021-03-30 20:02:28.080802+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:03:10.317691
License: Public Domain

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
                                 OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
                                         No. 19-1265V
                                        UNPUBLISHED

    MICHAEL VANG,                                           Chief Special Master Corcoran

                        Petitioner,                         Filed: February 25, 2021
    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)

Jerome A. Konkel, Samster, Konkel & Safran, S.C., Milwaukee, WI, for petitioner.

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

                                   RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

        On August 23, 2019, Michael Vang 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 left arm pain, adhesive capsulitis, and
disability which satisfies the Table definition for a shoulder injury related to vaccine
administration (“SIRVA”) or, in the alternative was caused-in-fact by the influenza vaccine
he received on December 7, 2017. Petition at 1, ¶¶ 2, 13-14. Petitioner further alleges
that he received the vaccination in the United States, continues to suffer the residual
effects of his SIRVA more than six months later, and that he has not filed a civil action or
received an award or settlement for his SIRVA, alleged as vaccine-caused. Id. at ¶¶ 2,
15-16. 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  Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required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 February 25, 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 concluded that compensation is appropriate because
[P]etitioner meets the criteria for a presumed SIRVA, as defined by the Vaccine Injury
Table.” Id. at 5. Respondent further agrees that “based on the current records, [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