Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Purdom v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 18-377V. (2019)

Court: United States Court of Federal Claims Number: infdco20190613b50 Visitors: 81
Filed: Apr. 05, 2019
Latest Update: Apr. 05, 2019
Summary: UNPUBLISHED RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1 NORA BETH DORSEY , Chief Special Master . On March 12, 2018, 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 a left shoulder injury related to vaccine administration as a result of her April 2, 2016 Tdap vaccination. Petition at 1-2. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Specia
More

UNPUBLISHED

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

On March 12, 2018, 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 a left shoulder injury related to vaccine administration as a result of her April 2, 2016 Tdap vaccination. Petition at 1-2. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On April 1, 2019, 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 "has determined that petitioner's medical course is consistent with a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration ("SIRVA") as defined by the Vaccine Injury Table." Id. at 4. Respondent further agrees that petitioner suffered residual effects of her injury for more than six months and that petitioner has satisfied all legal prerequisites to 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. The undersigned intends to post this ruling on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website. 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, the undersigned agrees that the identified material fits within this definition, the undersigned will redact such material from public access. Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, undersigned is 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).
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