Filed: Aug. 18, 2017
Latest Update: Aug. 18, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1 NORA BETH DORSEY , Chief Special Master . On February 17, 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 she suffered left shoulder injuries resulting from a Diphtheria, Tetanus, and Pertussis ("DTaP") vaccination received on September 21, 2015. Pet. at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of th
Summary: UNPUBLISHED RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1 NORA BETH DORSEY , Chief Special Master . On February 17, 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 she suffered left shoulder injuries resulting from a Diphtheria, Tetanus, and Pertussis ("DTaP") vaccination received on September 21, 2015. Pet. at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the..
More
UNPUBLISHED
RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1
NORA BETH DORSEY, Chief Special Master.
On February 17, 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 she suffered left shoulder injuries resulting from a Diphtheria, Tetanus, and Pertussis ("DTaP") vaccination received on September 21, 2015. Pet. at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.
On August 14, 2017, respondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he concedes that petitioner's alleged injury is consistent with a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration ("SIRVA") and that petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Resp.'s R. 4(c) Rept. at 1. Specifically, respondent "concluded that petitioner suffered a left-side shoulder injury and that the preponderance of the medical evidence indicated that the injury was causally related to the flu vaccination she received on September 21, 2015. Id. at 12. Respondent further agrees that no other causes for petitioner's injury were identified, that petitioner met the statutory requirements by suffering the condition for more than six months, and that petitioner has therefore satisfied all legal prerequisites for compensation under the Vaccine Act. 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.
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).
