Harris v. Secretary of Health and Human Services ( 2020 )

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 19-0197V
UNPUBLISHED
ERNESTINE HARRIS, Chief Special Master Corcoran
Petitioner, Filed: July 2, 2020
v.
Special Processing Unit (SPU);
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;
HUMAN SERVICES, Table Injury; Tetanus Diphtheria
acellular Pertussis (Tdap) Vaccine;
Respondent. Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine
Administration (SIRVA)
Jimmy A. Zgheib, Zgheib Sayad, P.C., White Plains, NY, for petitioner.
Claudia Barnes Gangi, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1
On February 4, 2019, Ernestine Harris 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 shoulder injury related to vaccine
administration (“SIRVA”) as a result of a tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis (“Tdap”
vaccination administered on September 28, 2017. Petition at 1,5. The case was
assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.
On June 30, 2020, 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
1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am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 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.
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).
at 1. Specifically, Respondent concludes that Petitioner suffered a Table injury and
states that “[n]o other causes for [P]etitioner’s SIRVA were identified.” Id. at 6.
Respondent further agrees that the statutory six month sequela requirement has been
satisfied. 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