The opinion
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 19-0549V
UNPUBLISHED
SAMUEL KAMAU, Chief Special Master Corcoran
Petitioner, Filed: June 25, 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)
Leah VaSahnja Durant, Law Offices of Leah V. Durant, PLLC, Washington, DC, for
petitioner.
Mallori Browne Openchowski, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for
respondent.
RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1
On April 15, 2019, Samuel Kamau 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 a left shoulder injury related to
vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) as a result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccine received on
February 27, 2018. Petition at 1. 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Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am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 June 24, 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 agrees that Petitioner’s alleged injury is consistent with a
SIRVA as defined in the Vaccine Injury Table. “Specifically, petitioner had no history of
pain, inflammation, or dysfunction of his left shoulder; medical records document that
pain occurred within 48 hours after receipt of an intramuscular vaccination; pain was
limited to the left shoulder in which the vaccine was administered; and no other
condition or abnormality has been identified to explain petitioner’s shoulder pain.” Id. at
4. Respondent further agrees that the records reflect that “petitioner suffered residual
effects of his injury for more than six months . . . . [and] 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