Molnar v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 24-712V

CHRISTINA MOLNAR, Chief Special Master Corcoran

Petitioner, Filed: August 12, 2026 v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent.

David John Carney, Green & Schafle LLC, Philadelphia, PA, for Petitioner.

Tyler King, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1

On May 7, 2024, Christina Molnar (“Petitioner”) 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 from a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) as a result of receiving an influenza (“flu”) vaccination on October 4, 2021. Pet., ECF No. 1. Petitioner further alleges that she suffered the residual effects of her injury for more than six months. Id. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On May 14, 2026, I issued a fact ruling finding that Petitioner’s pain and limited range of motion were limited to the vaccinated shoulder, as alleged. ECF No. 25. 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 July 27, 2026, Respondent filed his Amended Rule 4(c) report in which he states that in light of my Fact Ruling, he will not continue to defend this case during further proceedings on entitlement before this Court and thus requests a ruling on the record regarding Petitioner’s entitlement to compensation. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report at 1, ECF No. 29. Specifically, Respondent “maintain[ed] that [P]etitioner has not met her burden of proof under the Vaccine Act,” but in light of my findings, Respondent “no longer wishes to defend against [P]etitioner’s entitlement claim[.]” Id. at 3.

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