Chapman v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 21-0532V UNPUBLISHED

CANDY L. CHAPMAN, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, v. Filed: August 8, 2022 SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND Special Processing Unit (SPU); HUMAN SERVICES, Ruling on Entitlement; Concession; Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) and Respondent. Tetanus-Diphtheria-Acellular Pertussis (Tdap) Vaccines; Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA) Kathy Ann Lee, Christie Farrell Lee & Bell, P.C., Indianapolis, IN, for Petitioner.

Amanda Pasciuto, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1 On January 11, 2021, Candy L. Chapman 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 that as a result of influenza (“flu”) and tetanus- diphtheria-acellular pertussis (“Tdap”) vaccines received in her left shoulder on April 5, 2019, she suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”). Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

Because this unpublished Ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in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

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).

On August 8, 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 Petitioner has satisfied the criteria set forth in the 6-7Vaccine Injury Table (the “Table”) and the Qualifications and Aids to Interpretation (“QAI”) for a SIRVA Table injury. Id. at 7 (citing 42 C.F.R. §§ 100.3(a); (c)(10)).

Respondent further agrees that Petitioner all other legal prerequisites for compensation under the Vaccine Act. Id. (internal citations omitted).

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