Filed: Jun. 19, 2018
Latest Update: Jun. 19, 2018
Summary: UNPUBLISHED RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1 NORA BETH DORSEY , Chief Special Master . On September 15, 2017, Dolores Millican ("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 her receipt of an influenza ("flu") vaccine on September 20, 2016, caused her to suffer a left-sided shoulder injury related to vaccine administration ("SIRVA"). Petition at 1. The case was
Summary: UNPUBLISHED RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1 NORA BETH DORSEY , Chief Special Master . On September 15, 2017, Dolores Millican ("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 her receipt of an influenza ("flu") vaccine on September 20, 2016, caused her to suffer a left-sided shoulder injury related to vaccine administration ("SIRVA"). Petition at 1. The case was ..
More
UNPUBLISHED
RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1
NORA BETH DORSEY, Chief Special Master.
On September 15, 2017, Dolores Millican ("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 her receipt of an influenza ("flu") vaccine on September 20, 2016, caused her to suffer a left-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 June 19, 2018, 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 in that "petitioner 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 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 her symptoms." Id. at 4-5. Respondent further agrees that "based on the medical records outlined above, petitioner's SIRVA and its sequela persisted for more than six months after the administration of the vaccine", and therefore petitioner is entitled to a presumption of vaccine causation. Id. at 5.
In view of respondent's position and the evidence of record, 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. 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.
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).
