Hill v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 20-1424V

UNPUBLISHED

KELLI HILL, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: August 17, 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)

Henry Domenick Acciani, O’Connor, Acciani & Levy, Cincinnati, OH, for Petitioner.

Alexa Roggenkamp, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1 On October 20, 2020, Kelli Hill 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 Table injury –Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (“SIRVA”) – as a result of her influneza (“flu”) vaccination on September 29, 2018. Petition at 1; Status Report filed July 26, 2021. Petitioner further alleges the vaccine was administered within the United States, that she suffered the residual effects of her injury for more than six months, and that there has been no prior award or settlement of a civil action on her behalf as a result of her injury. See Petition at ¶¶ 2, 15, 18-19. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On August 15, 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 indicates that [m]edical personnel at the Division of Injury Compensation Programs (“DICP”), Department of Health and Human Services, have reviewed the petition and medical records filed in this case. Based on that review, it is respondent’s position that petitioner has satisfied the criteria set forth in the Vaccine Injury Table and Qualifications and Aids to Interpretation for a SIRVA injury from her flu vaccine. Specifically, petitioner had no history of pain, inflammation, or dysfunction of her right shoulder; pain more likely than not occurred within 48 hours after receipt of an intramuscular vaccination; pain was limited to the shoulder in which the vaccine was administered; and no other condition or abnormality has been identified to explain petitioner’s shoulder pain. 42 C.F.R. §§ 100.3(a), (c)(10). No other causes for petitioner’s SIRVA were identified. See 42 U.S.C. § 300aa- 13(a)(1)(B). In addition, given the medical records outlined above, the statutory six-month sequela requirement has been satisfied. See id. § 300aa-11(c)(D)(I). Therefore, based on the current record, petitioner has satisfied all legal prerequisites for compensation under the Act.

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