Filed: Jun. 18, 2018
Latest Update: Jun. 18, 2018
Summary: RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1 NORA BETH DORSEY , Chief Special Master . On September 15, 2017, Nicole Marshall ("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 from a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration ("SIRVA") as a result of receiving an influenza ("flu") vaccination in her left arm on August 29, 2016. Petition at 1. The case was a
Summary: RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1 NORA BETH DORSEY , Chief Special Master . On September 15, 2017, Nicole Marshall ("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 from a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration ("SIRVA") as a result of receiving an influenza ("flu") vaccination in her left arm on August 29, 2016. Petition at 1. The case was as..
More
RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1
NORA BETH DORSEY, Chief Special Master.
On September 15, 2017, Nicole Marshall ("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 from a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration ("SIRVA") as a result of receiving an influenza ("flu") vaccination in her left arm on August 29, 2016. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.
On June 15, 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 "DICP has concluded that petitioner's claim meets the Table criteria for SIRVA. Specifically, 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 the 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 petitioner's symptoms. Therefore, petitioner is entitled to a presumption of vaccine causation." Id. at 4. Respondent further agrees that "the records show that the case was timely filed, that the vaccine was received in the United States, and that petitioner satisfies the statutory severity requirement by suffering the residual effects or complications of her injury for more than six months after vaccine administration" and thus, respondent concedes that entitlement to compensation is appropriate under the terms of the Vaccine Act. Id. at 4-5.
In view of respondent's position and the evidence of record, the undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to compensation.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
