Gutierrez v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 24-1902V

JESSICA GUTIERREZ, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: June 30, 2025 v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent.

Brynna Gang, Kraus Law Group, LLC, Chicago, IL, for Petitioner.

Ryan Nelson, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1 On November 19, 2024, Jessica Guttierez 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”) following a Tdap vaccination she received on April 18,2 023.

Petition at 1. Petitioner further alleges that she has suffered the residual effects of her vaccine-related injury for more than six months. Petition at ¶ 20. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On June 20, 2025, 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 states that Petitioner’s alleged injury is consistent with SIRVA as defined by 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.

2 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 (2018). the Vaccine Injury Table. Specifically, Petitioner had no history of pain, inflammation, or dysfunction of her left shoulder prior to vaccination; pain occurred within forty-eight hours after receipt of an intramuscular vaccination; pain and reduced range of motion 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.” Id. at 4. Respondent further agrees that “based on the record as it now stands, Petitioner has satisfied all legal prerequisites for compensation under the Act.” 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