Cole v. Secretary of Health and Human Services ( 2015 )


Menu:
  •         In the United States Court of Federal Claims
    OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
    No. 14-911V
    Filed: March 11, 2015
    Unpublished
    ****************************
    JANETTE COLE,                              *
    *
    Petitioner,           *     Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;
    *     Tetanus Diphtheria acellular Pertussis
    *     (Tdap) Vaccine; Shoulder Injury Related
    SECRETARY OF HEALTH                        *     to Vaccine Administration; SIRVA;
    AND HUMAN SERVICES,                        *     Special Processing Unit
    *
    Respondent.           *
    *
    ****************************
    Paul R. Brazil, Esq., Muller Brazil, LLP, Philadelphia, PA for petitioner.
    Alexis Babcock, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC for respondent.
    RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1
    Vowell, Chief Special Master:
    On September 26, 2014, Janette Cole filed a petition for compensation under the
    National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq,2 [the
    “Vaccine Act” or “Program”]. Petitioner alleges that she “suffered shoulder injuries
    which were caused in fact” by the Tetanus diphtheria acellular pertussis [“Tdap”]
    vaccination she received on December 27, 2013. Petition at 1. The case was assigned
    to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.
    On March 11, 2015, respondent filed her Rule 4(c) report in which she concedes
    “compensation is appropriate” in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report at 3.
    Specifically, respondent “concludes that Ms. Cole suffered a Shoulder Injury Related to
    Vaccine Administration, a non-Table injury, and that the preponderance of the medical
    evidence indicates that the injury was causally related to the vaccination.” Id.
    1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I intend to
    post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, in accordance with the E-Government Act
    of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-347, § 205, 
    116 Stat. 2899
    , 2913 (codified as amended at 
    44 U.S.C. § 3501
    note (2006)). 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.
    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 (2006).
    In view of respondent’s concession and the evidence before me, I find that
    petitioner is entitled to compensation.
    s/Denise K. Vowell
    Denise K. Vowell
    Chief Special Master
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 14-911

Judges: Denise Kathryn Vowell

Filed Date: 4/1/2015

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/2/2015