Court Opinion

ID: 4467186
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2019-12-23 21:02:04.762195+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:34:24.581354
License: Public Domain

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
                                 OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
                                         No. 18-1787V
                                    Filed: October 25, 2019
                                        UNPUBLISHED

    LISA V. ADAMS,
                                                             Special Processing Unit (SPU);
                        Petitioner,                          Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;
    v.                                                       Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine;
                                                             Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine
    SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND                                  Administration (SIRVA)
    HUMAN SERVICES,

                        Respondent.

Leah VaSahnja Durant, Law Offices of Leah V. Durant, PLLC, Washington, DC, for
       petitioner.
Voris Edward Johnson, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

                                    RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

Corcoran, Chief Special Master:

       On November 20, 2018, petitioner 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”) resulting from the influenza vaccination she received in her left
deltoid on October 16, 2017. Petition at 1, ¶ 1. Petitioner further alleges that her injury
meets the Table definition for SIRVA, that she suffered the residual effects of her injury
for more than six months, that she continues to suffer these effects, and that neither she

1I intend to post this decision on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website. This means the
decision 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. Because this unpublished
decision 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).

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).
nor any other party has received compensation for her injury alleged as vaccine caused.
Id. at ¶¶ 4-6. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of
Special Masters.

        On October 24, 2019, 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 petitioner suffered a Table injury of
left SIRVA.” Id. at 4. Respondent further agrees that “based on the record as it now
stands, compensation is appropriate, as petitioner 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