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

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 18-362V
Filed: February 19, 2019
UNPUBLISHED
STEVEN FLETCHER,
Petitioner, Special Processing Unit (SPU);
v. Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;
Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine;
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine
HUMAN SERVICES, Administration (SIRVA)
Respondent.
Ronald Craig Homer, Conway, Homer, P.C., Boston, MA, for petitioner.
Claudia Barnes Gangi, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1
Dorsey, Chief Special Master:
On March 8, 2018, 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 he suffered a Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine
Administration (“SIRVA”) as a result of his November 3, 2016 influenza (“flu”)
vaccination. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the
Office of Special Masters.
1 The undersigned intends to post this ruling on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website. 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, the undersigned
agrees that the identified material fits within this definition, the undersigned will redact such material from
public access. Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this
case, undersigned is 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 February 15, 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 indicates that he
believes that petitioner’s medical course is consistent with a shoulder
injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) as defined on the
Vaccine Injury Table. Specifically, petitioner had no recent history of pain,
inflammation, or dysfunction of his right shoulder, pain occurred within 48
hours after receipt of an intramuscular vaccination, pain was limited to the
shoulder where the vaccine was administered, and no other condition or
abnormality, such as brachial neuritis, has been identified to explain
petitioner’s shoulder pain. 42 C.F.R. §§ 100.3(a), (c)(10) (2017).
Additionally, based on the medical records outlined above, petitioner
suffered the residual effects of his condition for more than six months.
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 Act. See 42
U.S.C. §§ 300aa-11(c)(1)(D)(I), 300aa-13(a)(1)(B).” Id. at 5.
In view of respondent’s position and the evidence of record, the
undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to compensation.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Nora Beth Dorsey
Nora Beth Dorsey
Chief Special Master