RECTOR v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
1:17-vv-01767
Fed. Cl.
Dec 30, 2019
Check Treatment
Docket

KATHRYN RECTOR, Petitioner, v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent.

No. 17-1767V

In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

November 20, 2019

Chief Special Master Corcoran

UNPUBLISHED; Special Processing Unit (SPU); Ruling on Entitlement; Concession; Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine; Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA)

Ronald Craig Homer, Conway, Homer, P.C., Boston, MA, for petitioner.

Ryan Daniel Pyles, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

On November 13, 2017, Kathryn Rector 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 Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA) after receiving the influenza vaccine on October 17, 2016. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On November 18, 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 acknowledges that “petitioner suffered a Table SIRVA” and “no other causes for petitioner‘s SIRVA were identified.” Id. at 3. Respondent further agrees that the statutory six month sequela requirement has been satisfied. Id.

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

Notes

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Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims’ website in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).