Elliott v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 20-1527V UNPUBLISHED

DRU ELLIOTT, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: May 20, 2022 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)

Howard Scott Gold, Gold Law Firm, LLC, Wellesley Hills, MA, for Petitioner.

Terrence Kevin Mangan, Jr., U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1 On November 5, 2020, Dru Elliott 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 that was administered on September 24, 2019. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On May 19, 2022, 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Specifically, Respondent agrees that “[P]etitioner’s claim meets the Table criteria for Because this unpublished Ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in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.

2National 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).

SIRVA.” Id. at 3. Respondent further agrees that “the case was timely filed, that the vaccine was received in the United States, and that [P]etitioner satisfies the statutory severity requirement.” 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