Bakalis v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 25-1584V

NICOLE BAKALIS, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, v. Filed: May 26, 2026 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 ENTITLEMENT1 On September 23, 2025, Nicole Bakalis filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq.2 (the “Vaccine Act”), which she amended on October 27, 2025. Petitioner alleges that she suffered a right shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) resulting from a tetanus diphtheria acellular pertussis (“Tdap”) vaccine received on September 25, 2024.

Amended Petition at 1. Petitioner further alleges that the vaccine was administered in the United States, she suffered residual effects of her injury for more than six months, and she has not received compensation in the form of an award or settlement for her vaccine- related injuries, nor has she filed a civil action for her injuries prior to filing her petition in this case. Amended Petition at ¶¶ 4, 19, 20, 25. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

1 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).

On May 26, 2026, Respondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he concedes that Petitioner is entitled to compensation. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report at 1. Specifically, Respondent recommends that Petitioner be found entitled to compensation for a Table SIRVA because “petitioner had no history of pain, inflammation, or dysfunction of her right shoulder prior to vaccination that would explain petitioner’s post-vaccination symptoms; shoulder pain occurred within forty-eight hours after receipt of an intramuscular Tdap 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 3-4. Respondent further agrees that Petitioner has established that she suffered residual effects of her condition for more than six months, and has satisfied all requirements for compensation under the Vaccine Act. Id. at 4.

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