Shogan v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
Opinion
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 25-0784V
ALEXANDER JOE SHOGAN, JR. also known as JOE SHOGAN, JR., Chief Special Master Corcoran
Petitioner, Filed: March 24, 2026 v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,
Respondent.
Stephen R. Matthews, Phillabaum Ledlin Matthews & Sheldon, PLLC, Spokane, WA, for Petitioner.
Dorian Hurley, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1
On May 6, 2025, Alexander Joe Shogan, Jr., also known as Joe Shogan Jr., 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 he suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) as the result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccination received on September 18, 2023. Petition at 1. Petitioner further alleges that he suffered the residual effects of his injury for more than six months. Petition at 9. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.
On March 23, 2026, Respondent filed a combined Rule 4(c) and Proffer (“Rule 4/Proffer”) report in which he concedes that Petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Rule 4/Proffer at 1. Specifically, Respondent states that “petitioner’s alleged injury is consistent with SIRVA as defined by the Vaccine Injury Table. Specifically, petitioner had no history of pain, inflammation, or dysfunction of his left shoulder prior to vaccination that would explain his post-vaccination symptoms; shoulder pain occurred within forty- eight hours after receipt of an intramuscular flu vaccination; shoulder pain and reduced ROM were limited to the side in which the vaccine was administered; and no other condition or abnormality has been identified to explain petitioner’s shoulder pain.” Id. at 6. Respondent further agrees that Petitioner suffered the residual effects of his condition for more than six months, and 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
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.