In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
Filed: April 18, 2016
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * UNPUBLISHED
JACKIE EVANS, *
* No. 16-97
Petitioner, *
*
v. * Special Master Hamilton-Fieldman
*
SECRETARY OF HEALTH *
AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Ruling on Entitlement; Conceded;
* Influenza (Flu) Vaccine; Shoulder Injury
Respondent. * Related to Vaccine Administration
* (SIRVA).
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Jeffrey S. Pop, Jeffrey S. Pop, Attorney at Law, Beverly Hills, CA, for Petitioner.
Douglas Ross, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1
On January 19, 2016, Jackie Evans (“Petitioner”) filed a petition for compensation under
the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (“the Program”). 2 Petitioner alleged that an
influenza (“flu”) vaccination administered on September 28, 2013 caused her to suffer from a
shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”).
On April 18, 2016, Respondent filed a report pursuant to Vaccine Rule 4(c) in which she
concedes that Petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Specifically, Respondent agrees
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Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the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 (2012). 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.
that Petitioner’s alleged injury is consistent with SIRVA. Based on a review of the medical
records, Respondent concludes that Petitioner has satisfied all legal prerequisites for
compensation under the Act.
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/ Lisa Hamilton-Fieldman
Lisa Hamilton-Fieldman
Special Master
2