Paul v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

Opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 17-117V Filed: August 31, 2017 UNPUBLISHED

HARRIET PAUL, Special Processing Unit (SPU); Petitioner, Ruling on Entitlement; Concession; v. Causation-In-Fact; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine; Shoulder Injury Related to SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND Vaccine Administration (SIRVA) HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent.

Joseph Alexander Vuckovich, Maglio Christopher & Toale, PA, Washington, DC, for petitioner. Daniel Anthony Principato, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1 Dorsey, Chief Special Master: On January 26, 2017, 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 received an influenza (“flu”) vaccine on November 20, 2015, and thereafter suffered from a left shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) which was caused-in-fact by the flu vaccine. Petition at 1-3. 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1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the undersigned intends to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website,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). 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, the undersigned agrees that the identified material fits within this definition, the undersigned 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 August 28, 2017, 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 a preponderance of evidence establishes that the injury to petitioner’s right shoulder was caused-in-fact by the administration of the flu vaccine on November 20, 2015. Id. at 3. Respondent further agrees that petitioner has satisfied all legal prerequisites for compensation under the Vaccine Act. Id. In view of respondent’s position and the evidence of record, the undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to compensation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Nora Beth Dorsey Nora Beth Dorsey Chief Special Master