To v. Secretary of Health and Human Services ( 2020 )

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 18-506V
UNPUBLISHED
NGOC BICH TO, Chief Special Master Corcoran
Petitioner, Filed: April 3, 2020
v.
Special Processing Unit (SPU);
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;
HUMAN SERVICES, Table Injury; Tetanus Diphtheria
acellular Pertussis (Tdap) Vaccine;
Respondent. Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine
Administration (SIRVA)
Hoa Xuan Manh, Charles H. Manh, P.C., Westminster, CA, for petitioner.
Camille Michelle Collett, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1
On April 6, 2018, Ngoc Bich To 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 right shoulder injury as a result of
a tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis (“Tdap”) vaccine administered on April 28, 2017.
Petition at 2, 5. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of
Special Masters.
On March 30, 2020, 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
1
Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am
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). 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, I agree that the identified material fits within this definition, I 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).
at 1. Specifically, Respondent concludes that “petitioner’s claim meets the Table criteria
for SIRVA.” Id. at 3. Respondent further agrees “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.” Id. at 4
In view of Respondent’s position and the evidence of record, I find that
Petitioner is entitled to compensation.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Brian H. Corcoran
Brian H. Corcoran
Chief Special Master
2