Schleif v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 16-584V Filed: September 28, 2016 UNPUBLISHED **************************** REBECCA SCHLEIF, * * Petitioner, * Ruling on Entitlement; Concession; v. * Tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis; * Tdap; Shoulder Injury: SIRVA; SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Special Processing Unit (“SPU”) AND HUMAN SERVICES, * * Respondent. * * **************************** Mark L. Krueger, Krueger & Hernandez, S.C., Baraboo, WI, for petitioner. Christine Mary Becer, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent. RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1 Dorsey, Chief Special Master: On May 17, 2016, 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 a left shoulder injury caused-in-fact by her December 19, 2013 tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis (“Tdap”) vaccination. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters. On September 26, 2016, respondent filed her Rule 4(c) report in which she concedes that petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report at 1. Specifically, respondent ” has concluded that a preponderance of evidence establishes that the injury to petitioner’s left shoulder was caused-in-fact by the administration of her December 19, 2013, Tdap vaccine, and that petitioner’s injury is not due to factors unrelated to the administration of the Tdap vaccine.” Id. at 3. 1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the undersigned intends to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website,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). 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, the undersigned agrees that the identified material fits within this definition, the undersigned will redact such material from public access. 2National 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). Respondent further agrees that the statutory six month sequela requirement has been satisfied and that petitioner. Id. In view of respondent’s concession and the evidence before me, the undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to compensation. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Nora Beth Dorsey Nora Beth Dorsey Chief Special Master 2