United States Court of Federal Claims, 2021

Fausnaugh v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Decided February 1, 2021 · Brian H. Corcoran

Opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 19-1056V UNPUBLISHED

SUSAN FAUSNAUGH, Chief Special Master Corcoran

Petitioner, Filed: December 1, 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)

Ronald Craig Homer, Conway, Homer, P.C., Boston, MA, for Petitioner.

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

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

On July 22, 2019, Susan Fausnaugh 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 (“SIRVA”) as a result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccine she received on October 18, 2017. Petition at Introduction. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On November 30, 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 states that “ petitioner’s alleged injury is consistent with a SIRVA, as defined on the Vaccine Injury Table. Specifically, petitioner had no history of pain, inflammation, or dysfunction of her 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 5. Respondent further agrees that Petitioner suffered residual effects of her 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

1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in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

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