Thompson v. Secretary of Health and Human Services ( 2014 )


Menu:
  •              In the United States Court of Federal Claims
    OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
    (Filed: September 16, 2014)
    * * * * * * * * * * * * * *                  *      UNPUBLISHED
    BEATRICE THOMPSON,                           *
    *      No. 14-558V
    Petitioner,                   *
    *
    v.                                           *      Special Master Dorsey
    *
    SECRETARY OF HEALTH                          *
    AND HUMAN SERVICES,                          *      Ruling on Entitlement; Conceded;
    *      Influenza (Flu) Vaccine; Shoulder Injury
    Respondent.                   *      Related to Vaccine Administration;
    *      SIRVA.
    * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
    Paul R. Brazil, Muller Brazil, LLP, Philadelphia, PA, for petitioner.
    Lara Ann Englund, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
    RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1
    On June 30, 2014, Beatrice Thompson (“petitioner”) filed a petition for compensation
    under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (“the Program”)2 alleging that she
    received an influenza (“flu”) vaccination on November 12, 2013, and thereafter developed left
    shoulder injuries. See Petition at 1.
    On September 15, 2014, respondent filed a report pursuant to Vaccine Rule 4(c) in which
    she concedes that petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent’s Report at 3-4.
    Specifically, respondent agrees that the alleged injury is consistent with shoulder injury related to
    1
    Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the
    undersigned intends to post this decision on the website of the United States Court of Federal
    Claims, in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002 § 205, 44 U.S.C. § 3501 (2006). In
    accordance with the Vaccine Rules, each party has 14 days within which to request redaction “of
    any information furnished by that party: (1) that is a trade secret or commercial or financial in
    substance and is privileged or confidential; or (2) that includes medical files or similar files, the
    disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy.” Vaccine Rule
    18(b). Further, consistent with the rule requirement, a motion for redaction must include a
    proposed redacted decision. If, upon review, the undersigned agrees that the identified material
    fits within the requirements of that provision, such material will be deleted from public access.
    2
    The Program comprises Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, 42
    U.S.C. §§ 300aa-10 et seq. (hereinafter “Vaccine Act” or “the Act”). Hereafter, individual
    section references will be to 42 U.S.C. § 300aa of the Act.
    vaccine administration (“SIRVA”). 
    Id. Based on
    a review of the medical records, respondent
    states that petitioner has met the applicable statutory requirements by suffering her condition for
    more than six months and that, therefore, petitioner has satisfied all legal prerequisites for
    compensation under the Act. 
    Id. A special
    master may determine whether a petitioner is entitled to compensation based
    upon the record. A hearing is not required. §300aa-13; Vaccine Rule 8(d). In light of
    respondent’s concession and a review of the record, the undersigned finds that petitioner is
    entitled to compensation. This matter shall now proceed to the damages phase.
    IT IS SO ORDERED.
    s/Nora Beth Dorsey
    Nora Beth Dorsey
    Special Master
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 1:14-vv-00558

Judges: Nora Beth Dorsey

Filed Date: 10/8/2014

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021