Beasley v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 23-0861V

SHARON BEASLEY, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: October 22, 2024 v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent.

Jonathan Joseph Svitak, Shannon Law Group, P.C., Woodridge, IL, for Petitioner.

Mary Eileen Holmes, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

DECISION1 On June 9, 2023, Sharon Beasley 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 alleged that she suffered a right shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”), a defined Table Injury, after receiving an influenza (“flu”) vaccine on October 9, 2021. Petition at 1, ¶¶ 2, 23-24. Regarding pain onset, she insisted that she suffered pain at a level of two out of ten upon vaccination, increasing to seven within 48 hours of vaccination. Petition at ¶¶ 5, 25; see also Exhibit 1 at ¶¶ 6, 18 (Petitioner’s declaration).

After determining there were multiple deficiencies related to Petitioner’s claim, including insufficient evidence of immediate (i.e., within 48 hours) pain after receipt of the vaccine at issue,3 I issued an order to show cause on August 23, 2024. ECF No. 23. I required Petitioner to address these deficiencies or to otherwise show cause why her claim should not be dismissed due to insufficient proof. Id. On October 18, 2024, Petitioner moved for a decision dismissing her petition. ECF No. 26. In the motion, Petitioner acknowledged that “she will be unable to prove that she is entitled to compensation under the Vaccine Program” (id. at ¶ 1) and “to proceed further would be unreasonable and would waste the resources of the Court, the [R]espondent, and the Vaccine Program” (id. at ¶ 2). Petitioner expressed her understanding that “a decision by the Special Master dismissing her petition will result in a judgment against her . . . [and] will end all of her rights in the Vaccine Program.” Id. at ¶ 3. She indicated that she “intends to elect to reject the Vaccine Program judgment against her and elect to file a civil action.” Id. at ¶ 5.

To receive compensation under the Program, Petitioner must prove that she received a vaccine covered by the Vaccine Program and then suffered either 1) a “Table Injury” – i.e., an injury falling within the Vaccine Injury Table – corresponding to a covered vaccine, or 2) an injury that was actually caused by a covered vaccine, a “non-Table claim.” See Sections 13(a)(1)(A) and 11(c)(1). Under the Vaccine Act, a petitioner may not be awarded compensation based on the petitioner’s claims alone. Rather, the petition must be supported by either the medical records or by a medical opinion. Section 13(a)(1).

In this case, the record does not contain medical records or a medical opinion sufficient to demonstrate that Petitioner has satisfied the requirements of a Table SIRVA or proven causation-in-fact. For these reasons, and in accordance with Section 12(d)(3)(A), Petitioner’s motion is GRANTED. Petitioner’s claim for compensation is DENIED and this case is DISMISSED for insufficient proof. The Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly.4 IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Brian H. Corcoran Brian H. Corcoran Chief Special Master 42 C.F.R. § 100.3(a) XIV.B. & (c)(10) (requirements for a Table SIRVA following receipt of the influenza vaccine); Althen v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 418 F.3d 1274, 1278 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (setting out the three-pronged, including the need for an appropriate temporal relationship, which must be met to establish causation).