United States Court of Federal Claims, 2019

Raiter v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Decided July 3, 2019 · Nora Beth Dorsey

Opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 18-0495V

Filed: April 23, 2019

UNPUBLISHED

BETH RAITER,

Petitioner, Special Processing Unit (SPU); v. Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;

Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine; SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine HUMAN SERVICES, Administration (SIRVA)

Respondent.

Howard Dale Mishkind, Mishkind Law Firm Co., L.P.A., Beachwood, Ohio, for petitioner. Christine Mary Becer, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

Dorsey, Chief Special Master:

On April 4, 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 the Table injury of shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) after receiving an influenza vaccination on September 10, 2015. Petition at ¶¶ 2-3. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On April 23, 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’s claim meets the Table criteria for SIRVA.” Id. at 3. Respondent further agrees that petitioner has satisfied all legal prerequisites for compensation under the Vaccine Act. Id. at 4.

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

1 The undersigned intends to post this ruling on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website. 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, the undersigned agrees that the identified material fits within this definition, the undersigned will redact such material from public access. Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, undersigned is required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in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). 2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755.

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.