United States Court of Federal Claims, 2019

Dallabetta v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Decided November 18, 2019 · Nora Beth Dorsey

Opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 18-1079V

Filed: August 30, 2019

UNPUBLISHED

AMANDA DALLABETTA,

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

Causation-In-Fact; Influenza (Flu) SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND Vaccine; Bursitis HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent.

Shealene Priscilla Mancuso, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA, for petitioner. Amy Paula Kokot, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

Dorsey, Chief Special Master:

On July 24, 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 a left shoulder injury as a result of an influenza vaccination received on September 19, 2016. Petition at 1, 4. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On August 30, 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 asserts that petitioner’s injury does not meet the Table criteria for a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”), but agrees that preponderant evidence establishes that petitioner’s September 19, 2016 flu vaccination caused her to develop bursitis in her left shoulder Id. at 4. Respondent further agrees that petitioner’s injury and its sequela persisted for more than six months after the administration of the vaccine. 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. Hereinafter, for ease of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa (2012).

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