Opinion

Smith v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

Court
United States Court of Federal Claims
Filed
Oct 27, 2020
Status
Unpublished
On the bench
Brian H. Corcoran
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 19-0745V

UNPUBLISHED

RENEE SMITH, Chief Special Master Corcoran

Petitioner, Filed: September 23, 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)

Bridget Candace McCullough, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA, for petitioner.

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

respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

On May 20, 2019, Renee Smith 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 which meets the Table definition of SIRVA and was caused in fact by the

influenza vaccine she received on September 22, 2017. Petition at 1, ¶ 2. Petitioner

further alleges she received the vaccine in the United States, that she suffered the

residual effects of her SIRVA for more than six months, and that neither she nor any other

party has filed a civil action or received compensation for her injuries, alleged as vaccine

caused. Petition at ¶¶ 2, 25-26. 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Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required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 September 23, 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 “believes that petitioner’s alleged injury is

consistent with SIRVA, as defined on the Vaccine Injury Table.” Id. at 4. Respondent

further agrees “that based on the record as it now stands, petitioner has satisfied all legal

prerequisites for compensation under the Act.” Id. at 5.

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

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.