United States Court of Federal Claims, 2022

Willis v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Decided January 19, 2022 · Brian H. Corcoran

Opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 19-0680V UNPUBLISHED

FELIX WILLIS, Chief Special Master Corcoran

Petitioner, Filed: December 15, 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)

Jerome A. Konkel, Samster, Konkel & Safran, S.C., Milwaukee, WI, for Petitioner. Claudia Barnes Gangi, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

On May 8, 2019, Felix Willis 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 he suffered from a left shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) following his receipt of an influenza (“flu”) vaccine on March 26, 2018. Petition at 1, 5. Petitioner further alleges that he experienced the symptoms of his injury for more than six months. Petition at 6. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On December 15, 2021, Respondent filed an Amended Rule 4(c) report in which he states that he does not contest that Petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report at 1. Specifically, Respondent states:

In this case, respondent maintains that petitioner has not met his burden of proof under the Vaccine Act, for the reasons set forth in his initial Rule 4(c) Report. See ECF No. 22 at 4-7. However, in light of petitioner’s expert report, respondent no longer wishes to defend against petitioner’s entitlement claim before the Office of Special Masters and requests a ruling on the record regarding petitioner’s entitlement to compensation

Id. at 5.

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1 Because this unpublished Ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in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