Johnson v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 24-1674V

SANDRA JOHNSON, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: March 5, 2026 v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent.

Maximillian J. Muller, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA, for Petitioner.

Sarah Black Rifkin, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1 On October 17, 2024, Sandra Johnson 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 that she suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) caused by an influenza (“flu”) vaccine received on October 12, 2023. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On January 6, 2026, I issued findings of fact, ruling that the vaccine was likely administered in Petitioner’s left shoulder (ECF No.19). On March 4, 2026, Respondent filed an amended Rule 4(c) report in which, in light of my January 5, 2026 ruling  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). concerning situs, he concedes that Petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case.

Respondent’s Amended Rule 4(c) Report at 1-8. Specifically, Respondent agrees that in light of my fact ruling concerning situs, Petitioner’s alleged injury is consistent with SIRVA as defined by the Vaccine Injury Table in that “petitioner had no history of pain, inflammation, or dysfunction of her left shoulder prior to vaccination; pain occurred within hours after receipt of an intramuscular vaccination; pain and reduced ROM [were] 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 8. Respondent further agrees that the records demonstrate that Petitioner suffered the residual effects of her condition for more than six months, and in light of the January 5, 2026 fact ruling and record, Respondent does not dispute that Petitioner has satisfied all legal prerequisites for compensation under the Vaccine Act. Id. at 8-9.

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

2