United States Court of Federal Claims, 2026

Gruenberger v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Decided September 14, 2026 · Brian H. Corcoran

Opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 25-1711V

JEANETTE ROSE GRUENBERGER,

Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner,

v. Filed: August 6, 2026 SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent.

Joseph Philip Ramos, JR., Ramos Law, LLC, Northglenn, CO, for Petitioner.

Mark Kim Hellie, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

On October 14, 2025, Jeanette Rose Gruenberger 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 a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) as the result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccination received on October 12, 2022. Petition at 1. Petitioner further alleges that she suffered the residual effects of her condition for more than six months. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On August 5, 2026, Respondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he concedes that Petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report at 1. Specifically, Respondent states that Petitioner’s “alleged injury is consistent with SIRA as defined by the Vaccine Injury Table. Specifically, petitioner had no history of pain, inflammation, or dysfunction of her right shoulder prior to vaccination; her pain occurred within forty-eight hours after receipt of an intramuscular vaccination; her pain and reduced range of motion 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 3-4. Respondent further agrees that “the case was timely filed, that the vaccine was received in the United States, and that petitioner satisfies the statutory severity requirement by suffering the residual effects or complications of her injury for more than six months after vaccine administration.” Id. Thus, Respondent “concedes that entitlement to compensation is appropriate under the terms of 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

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).

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