Eden v. Secretary of Health and Human Services ( 2023 )

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 21-508V
AMANDA EDEN, Chief Special Master Corcoran
Petitioner, Filed: November 27, 2023
v.
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES,
Respondent.
Jonathan Joseph Svitak, Shannon Law Group, P.C., Woodridge, IL, for Petitioner.
David Mark O'Dea, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1
On January 11, 2021, Amanda Eden 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”) resulting from an influenza (“flu”) vaccination she received on
November 10, 2020. Petition at 1. Petitioner further alleges that the vaccination was
administered within the United States, her pain lasted longer than six months, and neither
she, nor any other party, has ever filed any action or received compensation in the form
of an award or settlement for Petitioner’s vaccine-related injury. Petition at 1, 5. The case
was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.
1 Because this Ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action taken in this case, it must be made
publicly accessible and will be posted on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, and/or
at https://www.govinfo.gov/app/collection/uscourts/national/cofc, in accordance with the E-Government
Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2018) (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 section references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. §
300aa (2018).
On October 2, 2023, 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. Respondent concluded that “[P]etitioner’s alleged injury is consistent with SIRVA as
defined by the Vaccine Injury Table.” Id. at 4. Specifically, Respondent determined that
“[P]etitioner had no history of pain, inflammation, or dysfunction of her right shoulder prior
to vaccination; pain occurred within 48 hours after receipt of an intramuscular vaccination;
pain was limited to the shoulder in which the vaccine was administered; and no other
condition or abnormality has been identified to explain [P]etitioner’s shoulder pain.” Id.
Respondent further agrees that “[P]etitioner suffered the residual effects of her condition
for more than six months and required surgical intervention.” 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