Opinion

Barry v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

Court
United States Court of Federal Claims
Filed
Jul 7, 2017
Status
Unpublished
On the bench
Nora Beth Dorsey
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 16-1270V

Filed: January 23, 2017

UNPUBLISHED

****************************

ANGELA BARRY, *

*

Petitioner, * Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;

v. * Tetanus Diphtheria (“Tetanus”) Vaccine;

* Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine

SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Administration (“SIRVA”); Special

AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Processing Unit (“SPU”)

*

Respondent. *

*

****************************

Renee J. Gentry, Vaccine Injury Clinic, George Washington Univ. Law School,

Washington, DC, for petitioner.

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

respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

Dorsey, Chief Special Master:

On October 5, 2016, Angela Barry (“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”) as a result of receiving a Tetanus Diphtheria

(“Tetanus”) vaccine on February 7, 2015. Petition at Introduction. The case was

assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On January 23, 2017, respondent filed her Rule 4(c) report in which she

concedes that petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule

4(c) Report at 1. Specifically, respondent states that no other causes were identified for

petitioner’s shoulder injury and the medical records show that petitioner suffered the

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Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the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).

residual effects of her condition for more than six months. Id. at 5-6. Respondent

further agrees that petitioner has satisfied all legal prerequisites for compensation under

the Act. Id. at 6.

In view of respondent’s concession and the evidence before me, the

undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to compensation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Nora Beth Dorsey

Nora Beth Dorsey

Chief Special Master

2

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.