United States Court of Federal Claims, 2019

Cayton v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Decided August 21, 2019 · Nora Beth Dorsey

Opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 18-75V

Filed: June 6, 2019

UNPUBLISHED

SHERRI CAYTON,

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

Table Injury; Pneumococcal SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND Conjugate Vaccine; Shoulder Injury HUMAN SERVICES, Related to Vaccine Administration

(SIRVA) Respondent.

Jessica Anne Olins, Maglio Christopher & Toale, PA, Washington, DC, for petitioner. Ryan Daniel Pyles, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1 Dorsey, Chief Special Master:

On January 16, 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 received a pneumococcal vaccination on December 16, 2016, and thereafter suffered a right-sided shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”). Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On June 4, 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 2- 3. Specifically, respondent concluded that petitioner’s claim meets the Table criteria for a SIRVA Id. at 3. Respondent further agrees that petitioner satisfied the statutory requirements for compensation in this case. 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

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 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, undersigned is required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in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.