United States Court of Federal Claims, 2025

Sorby v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Decided August 26, 2025 · Brian H. Corcoran

Opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 23-0370V

KAITLYN SORBY, Chief Special Master Corcoran

Petitioner, v. Filed: July 22, 2025 SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent.

Jonathan Joseph Svitak, Shannon Law Group, P.C., Woodridge, IL, for Petitioner. Nathaniel Trager, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1

On March 14, 2023, Kaitlyn Sorby filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq.2 (the “Vaccine Act”). On June 13, 2021, Petitioner received a tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis (“Tdap”) vaccine, which vaccine is listed in the Vaccine Injury Table (the “Table”), 42 C.F.R. § 100.3(a). Petitioner alleges that she suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) within the time period set forth in the Table, or in the alternative, that she suffered a SIRVA that was caused-in-fact by the Tdap vaccine. Petitioner further alleges that she experienced the residual effects of the alleged injury for more than six months.

1 Because this Decision 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 Decision 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).

Respondent denies that Petitioner sustained a Table SIRAVA and denies that the vaccine caused Petitioner’s alleged shoulder injury, or any other injury.

Nevertheless, on July 22, 2025, the parties filed the attached joint stipulation,3 stating that a decision should be entered awarding compensation. I find the stipulation reasonable and adopt it as my decision awarding damages, on the terms set forth therein.

Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Stipulation, I award the following compensation:

A lump sum of $70,000.00 to be paid through an ACH deposit to Petitioner’s counsel’s IOLTA account for prompt disbursement to Petitioner. Stipulation at ¶ 8. This amount represents compensation for all items of damages that would be available under Section 15(a). Id. I approve the requested amount for Petitioner’s compensation. In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this decision.4

IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Brian H. Corcoran Brian H. Corcoran Chief Special Master

3 In attaching the parties’ joint stipulation, I have omitted the last page – an RSign form that includes personal information regarding Petitioner. 4 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment can be expedited by the parties’ joint filing of notice renouncing the right to seek review.

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.