Salas v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 23-1101V

EILEEN M. SALAS, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: September 22, 2025 v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent.

Jeffrey S. Pop, Jeffrey S. Pop & Associates, Beverly Hills, CA, for Petitioner.

Debra A. Filteau Begley, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION 1 On July 18, 2023, Eileen M. Salas 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 shoulder injuries related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) as a result of a tetanus, diphtheria, and acellular pertussis (“Tdap”) vaccine administered on May 27, 2022. Petition at 1; Stipulation, filed at September 12, 2025, ¶¶ 1, 2. Additionally, Petitioner alleges she suffered Brachial Neuritis (“BN”) that was caused-in-fact by the Tdap vaccine. Petition at 1; Stipulation at ¶4. Petitioner further alleges that the vaccine was administered within the United States, that she sustained an injury within the time period set forth in the Vaccine Injury Table or the vaccine significantly aggravated a pre-existing injury, that she experienced the residual effects of her condition for more than six months, and that there has been no award or settlement of a civil action for damages on her behalf as a result of her injury.

Petition at 1, 6-7; Stipulation at ¶¶ 1-5. Respondent denies that Petitioner sustained a SIRVA Table injury; denies that the vaccine caused Petitioner’s alleged shoulder injury, 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).

BN, or any other injury; or that the vaccine significantly aggravated a pre0existing injury; and denies that her current condition is a sequela of a vaccine-related injury. Stipulation at ¶ 6.

Nevertheless, on September 19, 2025, the parties filed the attached joint stipulation, 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. A lump sum of $45,000.00, to be paid through an ACH deposit to Petitioner’s counsel’s IOLTA account for prompt disbursement to Petitioner; and B. A lump sum of $7,020.52, representing reimbursement of a Medicaid lien for services to Petitioner by the State of California, in the form of a check payable jointly to Petitioner and Department of Health Care Services Personal Injury Program, MS 4720 P.O. Box 997421 Sacramento, CA 95899-7421 Re: Eileen Salas DCHCS No. C92861140A-001T Petitioner agrees to endorse this check to the Department of Health Care Services.

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. 3 IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Brian H. Corcoran Brian H. Corcoran Chief Special Master

3 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.