Rouse v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 21-608V

DOUGLAS ROUSE, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: September 18, 2023 v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent.

Leah VaSahnja Durant, Law Offices of Leah V. Durant, PLLC, Washington, DC, for Petitioner.

Alec Saxe, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1 On January 12, 2021, Douglas Rouse 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 a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) resulting from adverse effects of an influenza (flu) vaccination he received on November 10, 2020. Petition at 1. Petitioner further alleges that the vaccination was administered within the United States, the effects of his injury lasted more than six months, and neither h, nor any other party, has ever received compensation in the form of an award or settlement for his vaccine-related injury. See Petition at 2; see also Petitioner’s Affidavit (Exhibit 6). The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

1 Because this Ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action taken in this case, it must be made publicly accessible and will be posted on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, and/or at https://www.govinfo.gov/app/collection/uscourts/national/cofc, in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2018) (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 “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa (2012).

On August 21, 2023, 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. Respondent concluded that Petitioner’s alleged injury is consistent with SIRVA as defined by the Vaccine Injury Table. Specifically, Respondent determined that “[P]etitioner had no history of pain, inflammation, or dysfunction of his left shoulder prior to vaccination; pain 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 his shoulder pain.” Id. at 5.

Respondent further agrees that Petitioner suffered the residual effects of his condition for more than six months. 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