Filed: Jan. 31, 2020
Latest Update: Jan. 31, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1 BRIAN H. CORCORAN , Chief Special Master . Special Processing Unit (SPU); Ruling on Entitlement; Concession; Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine; Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA). On November 7, 2018, Erin Jensen 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 right shoulder injury related
Summary: UNPUBLISHED RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1 BRIAN H. CORCORAN , Chief Special Master . Special Processing Unit (SPU); Ruling on Entitlement; Concession; Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine; Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA). On November 7, 2018, Erin Jensen 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 right shoulder injury related t..
More
UNPUBLISHED
RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1
BRIAN H. CORCORAN, Chief Special Master.
Special Processing Unit (SPU); Ruling on Entitlement; Concession; Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine; Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA).
On November 7, 2018, Erin Jensen 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 right shoulder injury related to vaccine administration ("SIRVA"), as a result of an influenza ("flu") vaccine she received on October 27, 2016. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.
On January 30, 2020, 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 states that Petitioner's claim meets the Table criteria for SIRVA. Id. at 4. Respondent further agrees that "[P]etitioner had no history of pain, inflammation or dysfunction of the affected shoulder prior to intramuscular vaccine administration that would explain the alleged signs, symptoms, examination findings, and/or diagnostic studies occurring after vaccine injection; she likely suffered the onset of pain within forty-eight hours of vaccine administration; her pain and reduced range of motion were limited to the shoulder in which the intramuscular vaccine was administered; and there is no other condition or abnormality present that would explain petitioner's symptoms." Id.
In view of Respondent's position and the evidence of record, I find that Petitioner is entitled to compensation.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
