Godwin v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 19-1981V
UNPUBLISHED
KAREN GODWIN, Chief Special Master Corcoran
Petitioner, Filed: June 28, 2021
v.
Special Processing Unit (SPU);
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;
HUMAN SERVICES, Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine;
Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine
Respondent. Administration (SIRVA)
Leigh Finfer, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA, for Petitioner.
Ida Nassar, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1
On December 30, 2019, Karen Godwin 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 left shoulder injury related to vaccine
administration (“SIRVA”) which meets the Table definition for SIRVA or which, in the
alternative, was caused-in-fact by the influenza vaccine she received on October 26,
2018. Petition at 1, ¶¶ 2, 21. Petitioner further alleges that she received the vaccine in the
United States, that she suffered the residual effects of her SIRVA for more than six
months, and that neither she nor any other party has filed a civil action or received
compensation for her SIRVA. Id. at ¶¶ 2, 21-22. The case was assigned to the Special
Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.
1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required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).
On June 25, 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 believes that “[P]etitioner has satisfied the criteria set forth in
the Vaccine Injury Table (“Table”) and the Qualifications and Aids to Interpretation
(“QAI”).” Id. at 6.
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