United States Court of Federal Claims, 2021

Rose v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Decided March 11, 2021 · Brian H. Corcoran

Opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 19-1639V UNPUBLISHED

DEBRA ROSE, Chief Special Master Corcoran

Petitioner, Filed: February 9, 2021 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)

Bobbie L. Flynt, Crandall & Pera Law, LLC, Chagrin Falls, OH, for petitioner. Darryl R. Wishard, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

On October 22, 2019, Debra Rose 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 related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) as a result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccine administered on November 11, 2018. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On February 8, 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 agrees that “petitioner’s alleged injury is consistent with SIRVA of the left arm and that it meets the requirements of a Table injury claim for SIRVA stemming from the flu vaccination on November 11, 2018.” Id. at 4. Respondent further states that he “did not identify any other causes for petitioner’s left arm injury, and records show that she suffered the sequela of this injury for more than six months . . . . Therefore, based on the record as it now stands, petitioner 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1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in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.