Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

ROMERO v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, 15-1265V. (2016)

Court: United States Court of Federal Claims Number: infdco20160505a31 Visitors: 17
Filed: Jan. 22, 2016
Latest Update: Jan. 22, 2016
Summary: UNPUBLISHED RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1 NORA BETH DORSEY , Chief Special Master . On October 27, 2015, 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 alleged that she developed a rotator cuff tear and other shoulder injuries as a result of receiving a seasonal influenza ("flu") vaccination on November 2, 2014. Petition at 1-2. The case was assigned to the Special Processi
More

UNPUBLISHED

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

On October 27, 2015, 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 alleged that she developed a rotator cuff tear and other shoulder injuries as a result of receiving a seasonal influenza ("flu") vaccination on November 2, 2014. Petition at 1-2. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On January 21, 2016, respondent filed her Rule 4(c) report in which she concedes that petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent's Rule 4(c) Report at 1. Specifically, respondent states that a "preponderance of the evidence establishes that petitioner's injury is consistent with a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration ("SIRVA"), and that petitioner's injury is not due to factors unrelated to her November 2, 2014 flu vaccination. Thus, in light of the information contained in petitioner's medical records, respondent has concluded that petitioner's left shoulder injury is compensable as a "caused-in-fact" injury under the Act. Id. at 2-3.

In view of respondent's concession and the evidence before me, the undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to compensation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

FootNotes


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 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the undersigned intends to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website,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, Pub. L. No. 107-347, § 205, 116 Stat. 2899, 2913 (codified as amended at 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2006)). 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.
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).
Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer