R. v. Secretary of Health and Human Services ( 2022 )

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 20-0652V
UNPUBLISHED
L.R., Chief Special Master Corcoran
Petitioner, Filed: July 15, 2022
v.
Special Processing Unit (SPU);
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND Damages Decision Based on Proffer;
HUMAN SERVICES, Tetanus Diphtheria (Td) Vaccine;
Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine
Respondent. Administration (SIRVA)
Ronald Craig Homer, Conway, Homer, P.C., Boston, MA, for Petitioner.
Terrence Kevin Mangan, Jr., U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for
Respondent.
DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1
On May 28, 2020, L. R. 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 right shoulder injury related to vaccine
administration (“SIRVA”) as a result of a Tetanus diphtheria (“Td”) vaccine administered
on December 5, 2017. Petition at 1-2. Petitioner further alleges that the vaccine was
administered in the United States, she suffered the residual effects of her injury for more
than six months after administration of the Td vaccine, and no lawsuits have been filed or
settlements or awards accepted by anyone, including Petitioner, due to her vaccine-
related injury. Petition at ¶¶ 10-12. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit
of the Office of Special Masters.
1
Because this unpublished Decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am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). 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.
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 (2012).
On December 22, 2021, a ruling on entitlement was issued, finding Petitioner
entitled to compensation for SIRVA. On July 15, 2022, Respondent filed a proffer on
award of compensation (“Proffer”) indicating Petitioner should be awarded $50,496.16.
Proffer at 1-2. In the Proffer, Respondent represented that Petitioner agrees with the
proffered award. Id. Based on the record as a whole, I find that Petitioner is entitled to an
award as stated in the Proffer.
Pursuant to the terms stated in the Proffer, I award Petitioner a lump sum
payment of $50,496.16 (representing $50,000.00 in pain and suffering and $496.16
in past unreimbursable expenses) in the form of a check payable to Petitioner. This
amount represents compensation for all damages that would be available under Section
15(a).
The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this decision.3
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Brian H. Corcoran
Brian H. Corcoran
Chief Special Master
3
Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment can be expedited by the parties’ joint filing of notice
renouncing the right to seek review.
2