Riviere v. Secretary of Health and Human Services ( 2019 )


Menu:
  •          In the United States Court of Federal Claims
    OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
    No. 18-1482V
    UNPUBLISHED
    MARY RIVIERE,                                            Chief Special Master Corcoran
    Petitioner,                          Filed: November 8, 2019
    v.
    Special Processing Unit (SPU);
    SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND                                  Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;
    HUMAN SERVICES,                                          Causation-In-Fact; Pneumococcal
    Conjugate Vaccine; Cellulitis
    Respondent.
    Shealene Priscilla Mancuso, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA, for petitioner.
    Mark Kim Hellie, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
    RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1
    On September 26, 2018, Mary Riviere 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 cellulitis, sepsis injuries and left
    extremity injuries caused in fact by the administration of the pneumococcal conjugate
    vaccine she received on November 3, 2016. Petition at 1, ¶¶ 2, 14. Petitioner further
    alleges that she received the influenza vaccination in the United States, that she
    suffered the residual effects of her injuries for more than six months, and that neither
    she nor any other party has filed a civil action or received compensation for her injuries,
    alleged as vaccine caused. Petition at ¶¶ 2, 14-16. The case was assigned to the
    Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.
    1I intend to post this decision on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website. This means the
    decision 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. Because this unpublished
    decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required to post it on the United
    States Court of Federal Claims' website in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. §
    3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of Electronic Government Services).
    2National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755. Hereinafter, for
    ease of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. §
    300aa (2012).
    On November 8, 2019, 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 “[has] concluded that a preponderance of the
    medical evidence establishes that petitioner’s left upper extremity cellulitis was caused-
    in-fact by the pneumococcal vaccine she received on November 3, 2016.” 
    Id. at 4.
    Respondent further agrees that “based on the record as it now stands, petitioner has
    satisfied all legal prerequisites for compensation under the Vaccine 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
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 18-1482

Judges: Brian H. Corcoran

Filed Date: 12/27/2019

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 12/27/2019