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

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 19-0555V
UNPUBLISHED
RUSSELL PEARCE, Chief Special Master Corcoran
Petitioner, Filed: July 17, 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)
Maximillian J. Muller, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA, for petitioner.
Traci R. Patton, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1
On April 15, 2019, Russell Pearce 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”) caused-in-fact by the tetanus, diphtheria, acellular pertussis
(“tdap”) vaccine on September 27, 2017. Petition at ¶¶ 2, 12. The case was assigned to
the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.
On July 16, 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Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am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.
2
National 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 “has concluded that compensation is appropriate
because petitioner meets the criteria for a presumed SIRVA, as defined by the Vaccine
Injury Table.” Id. at 4. Respondent further agrees that “petitioner has satisfied all legal
prerequisites for compensation under the 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