Conley v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 19-1458V UNPUBLISHED

KAREN CONLEY, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: February 4, 2021 v. Special Processing Unit (SPU); SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND Ruling on Entitlement; Concession; HUMAN SERVICES, Table Injury; Influenza (flu) Vaccine and Pneumococcal Conjugate Respondent. Vaccine; Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA)

Sean Franks Greenwood, Greenwood Law Firm, Houston, TX, for petitioner.

Voris Edward Johnson, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1 On September 23, 2019, Karen Conley 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 from a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) after receiving a flu and pneumonia vaccine on December 2, 2018. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On January 25, 2021, 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 Specifically, Respondent concluded that Petitioner “ suffered a Table injury of right Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in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).

SIRVA. DICP did not identify any other causes for petitioner’s right SIRVA, and based on the medical records outlined above, petitioner met the statutory requirements by experiencing six months of residual effects . . . . Therefore, based on the record as it now stands, compensation is appropriate, as petitioner has satisfied all legal prerequisites for compensation under the Act.” Id. at 5. Respondent further agrees that the scope of damages to be awarded is limited to [P]etitioner’s right SIRVA and its related sequelae only.” 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