In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 18-0140V
Filed: February 27, 2019
UNPUBLISHED
CYNTHIA NUTE,
Petitioner, Special Processing Unit (SPU);
v. Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;
Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine;
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine
HUMAN SERVICES, Administration (SIRVA)
Respondent.
Maximillian J. Muller, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA, for petitioner.
Christine Mary Becer, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1
Dorsey, Chief Special Master:
On January 30, 2018, 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 that she suffered a shoulder injury related to
vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) as a result of an influenza vaccination received on
September 21, 2016. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing
Unit of the Office of Special Masters.
1The undersigned intends to post this ruling on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website. 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, the undersigned
agrees that the identified material fits within this definition, the undersigned will redact such material from
public access. Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this
case, undersigned is 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).
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).
On February 26, 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 agrees 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, the
undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to compensation.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Nora Beth Dorsey
Nora Beth Dorsey
Chief Special Master