Delreal v. Secretary of Health and Human Services ( 2021 )

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 19-1352V
UNPUBLISHED
ANDRES DELREAL, Chief Special Master Corcoran
Petitioner, Filed: February 23, 2021
v.
Special Processing Unit (SPU);
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;
HUMAN SERVICES, Table Injury; Tetanus Diphtheria (Td)
Vaccine; Shoulder Injury Related to
Respondent. Vaccine Administration (SIRVA)
Jerome A. Konkel, Samster, Konkel & Safran, S.C., Milwaukee, WI, for petitioner.
Lara Ann Englund, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1
On September 5, 2019, Andres Delreal 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”) and disability caused-in-fact by the tetanus-diptheria vaccine he
received on June 7, 2018. Petition at 1, ¶¶ 2, 14. The case was assigned to the Special
Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.
On February 23, 2021, 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 “has concluded that compensation is appropriate because
[P]etitioner meets the criteria for a presumed SIRVA, as defnied by the Vaccine Injury
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Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required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).
Table.” Id. at 3. Respondent further agrees that “based on the current record, [P]etitioner
has satisfied all legal prerequisites for compensation under the Act.” Id. at 4.
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