DocketNumber: 17-773
Judges: Nora Beth Dorsey
Filed Date: 5/10/2018
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 4/18/2021
In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 17-773V Filed: February 22, 2018 UNPUBLISHED CARLOS ORDUZ, Special Processing Unit (SPU); Petitioner, Ruling on Entitlement; Concession; v. Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine; Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND Administration (SIRVA) HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Leah VaSahnja Durant, Law Offices of Leah V. Durant, PLLC, Washington, DC, for petitioner. Linda Sara Renzi, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent. RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1 Dorsey, Chief Special Master: On June 12, 2017, petitioner 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 that his receipt of an influenza (“flu”) vaccine on September 20, 2016, caused him to suffer a right-sided shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”). Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters. On February 22, 2018, respondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he concedes that petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule 1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the undersigned intends to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website,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). 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, the undersigned agrees that the identified material fits within this definition, the undersigned 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). 4(c) Report at 1. Specifically, respondent states that the Division of Injury Compensation Programs, Department of Health and Human Services (“DICP”) “has concluded that petitioner’s alleged injury is consistent with SIRVA, as defined on the Vaccine Injury Table.”Id. at 4.
Respondent further agrees that “petitioner’s pain occurred within 48 hours of receipt of an intramuscular vaccination, pain was limited to the shoulder in which the vaccine was administered, and no other condition or abnormality was identified to explain his shoulder pain”.Id. In view
of respondent’s position and the evidence of record, the undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to compensation. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Nora Beth Dorsey Nora Beth Dorsey Chief Special Master 2