VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-00337
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-00337
Petitioner: Jennifer Crossing
Filed: 2015-04-01
Decided: 2015-08-03
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 2013-12-06
Condition: shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA)
Outcome: compensated
Award amount USD: 100000

AI-assisted case summary:
Jennifer Crossing filed a petition on April 1, 2015, alleging that an influenza vaccine administered on December 6, 2013, caused her to suffer a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA). The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, filed a report conceding that the petitioner's injury was consistent with SIRVA and was caused-in-fact by the flu vaccine. The respondent concluded that the petitioner had satisfied all legal prerequisites for compensation under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act. The petitioner, born on September 5, 1985, was approximately 28 years old at the time of vaccination. Her medical history included food allergies and lower back pain. Thirty-five days after the vaccination, she presented with left shoulder pain, which was evaluated by Dr. Laura Dunne. Initial evaluations included an X-ray, which was normal, and an impression of traumatic rotator cuff tendonitis from the flu shot. Treatments included meloxicam and physical therapy. Subsequent evaluations and imaging, including an MRI and EMG, were performed. The MRI showed edema within the lateral humeral head and neck, with some evidence of supraspinatous tendinosis and subacromial bursitis. An EMG of the left shoulder was normal. Petitioner also sought a second opinion from orthopedist Robert Palumbo, M.D., who noted pain following the flu injection with edema within the humeral head possibly secondary to interosseous injection. Petitioner was prescribed neurotonin for nerve pain, which was ineffective, and referred for acupuncture and chiropractic treatment. The respondent's medical personnel reviewed the case and concluded that compensation was appropriate. The parties stipulated to an award of $100,000.00 for all elements of compensation, representing a lump sum payment to the petitioner. Subsequently, on August 12, 2015, the parties filed a stipulation for attorney fees and costs. Chief Special Master Denise Kathryn Vowell issued a decision awarding $18,500.00 in attorneys' fees and $1,464.76 in costs, for a total of $19,964.76, payable jointly to the petitioner and her counsel, Lawrence Cohan.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioner Jennifer Crossing, born September 5, 1985, received an influenza vaccine on December 6, 2013. She alleged a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA). The respondent conceded that the injury was consistent with SIRVA and was caused-in-fact by the flu vaccine. The public decision does not detail the specific mechanism of injury or name medical experts. The injury was described as SIRVA, which is an "Off-Table" condition. The parties stipulated to an award of $100,000.00 for all elements of compensation, paid as a lump sum to the petitioner. Attorneys' fees and costs were subsequently stipulated and awarded as $18,500.00 and $1,464.76, respectively, totaling $19,964.76, paid jointly to petitioner and counsel. The decision was issued by Chief Special Master Denise Kathryn Vowell on August 3, 2015, with the fees decision on September 2, 2015. Petitioner's counsel was Lawrence Cohan, and respondent's counsel was Althea Davis.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-00337-0
Date issued/filed: 2015-08-03
Pages: 8
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 07/13/2015) regarding 14 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer ( Signed by Chief Special Master Denise Kathryn Vowell.)(mpj) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:15-vv-00337-UNJ Document 18 Filed 08/03/15 Page 1 of 8
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 15-0337V
Filed: July 13, 2015
Unpublished
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
JENNIFER CROSSING, *
*
Petitioner, * Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;
* Influenza (“flu”) vaccine; Shoulder Injury
v. * Related to Vaccine Administration
* (“SIRVA”); Damages Decision Based
* on Proffer; Special Processing Unit
SECRETARY OF HEALTH * (“SPU”)
AND HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
Respondent. *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Lawrence Cohan, Anapol, Schwartz, et al., Philadelphia, PA, for petitioner.
Althea Davis, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
1
DECISION
Vowell, Chief Special Master:
On April 1, 2015, Jennifer Crossing filed a petition for compensation under the
National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq,2 [the
“Vaccine Act” or “Program”]. The petition alleges that as a result of an Influenza (“flu”)
vaccination on December 6, 2013, petitioner suffered a shoulder injury related to
vaccine administration (“SIRVA”). The case was assigned to the Special Processing
Unit (“SPU”) of the Office of Special Masters.
On July 13, 2015, respondent filed her Rule 4(c) report [“Res. Report”], in which
she concedes that petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Res. Report at 4.
Specifically, respondent “has concluded that petitioner’s alleged injury is consistent with
1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, it will be
posted on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, in accordance with the E-Government Act
of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-347, § 205, 116 Stat. 2899, 2913 (codified as amended at 44 U.S.C. § 3501
note (2006)). 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 (2006).

Case 1:15-vv-00337-UNJ Document 18 Filed 08/03/15 Page 2 of 8
[SIRVA], and that it was caused-in-fact by the flu vaccine she received on December 6,
2013.” Id. Respondent stated that “based on the record as it now stands, petitioner
has satisfied all legal prerequisites for compensation under the [Vaccine] Act.” Id. at 5.
In view of respondent’s concession and the evidence before me, I find that
petitioner is entitled to compensation.
Additionally, respondent incorporated a proffer on award of compensation
(“Proffer”) into her Rule 4(c) report detailing compensation for all elements of
compensation to which petitioner would be entitled under §15(a). According to
respondent’s Proffer, petitioner agrees to the proposed award of compensation.
Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Proffer, I award petitioner a lump
sum payment of $100,000.00 in the form of a check payable to petitioner.
This amount represents compensation for all damages that would be available
under §15(a).
The clerk of the court is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this
decision.3
s/Denise K. Vowell
Denise K. Vowell
Chief Special Master
3 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment can be expedited by each party filing a notice
renouncing the right to seek review.
2

Case 1:15-vv-00337-UNJ Document 18 Filed 08/03/15 Page 3 of 8
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
JENNIFER CROSSING, )
)
)
Petitioner, ) No. 15-337V
) Chief Special Master
v. ) Denise Vowell
)
SECRETARY OF HEALTH )
AND HUMAN SERVICES, )
)
Respondent. )
)
RESPONDENT’S RULE 4(c) REPORT AND PROFFER ON DAMAGES
On April 1, 2015, Jennifer Crossing (“petitioner”) filed a petition for
compensation (“Petition”) under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, 42
U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 to -34, as amended. Petitioner alleges that, as a result of receiving the
influenza (“flu”) vaccine on December 6, 2013, she suffered a shoulder injury that was
caused-in-fact by her vaccination. Petition at 1, 2.
In accordance with the Rules of the United States Court of Federal Claims,
Appendix B, Vaccine Rule 4(c), and the special master’s June 12, 2015 Order, the
Secretary of Health and Human Services (“respondent”), submits the following as her
responsive report. The facts of this case, as reflected in the petition and accompanying
documents, were reviewed by medical personnel of the Division of Injury Compensation
Programs, Department of Health and Human Services (“DICP”). Their opinion is that
this case is appropriate for compensation under the terms of the Act.

Case 1:15-vv-00337-UNJ Document 18 Filed 08/03/15 Page 4 of 8
FACTS
Petitioner was born on September 5, 1985. Pet. Ex. 2 at 230. At the time of
vaccination, petitioner was married and a stay-at-home mother of two children. Id. at
230. Petitioner’s medical history included food allergies and lower back pain from a fall
in September 2012. Id. at 141, 230. Petitioner has received chiropractic care from
September 2012 until the present time for persistent lower back pain and muscle spasms.
Id. at 230.
On December 6, 2013, petitioner received a flu vaccination at her primary care
physician’s office. Pet. Ex. 1 at 26. Thirty-five days later, petitioner presented to Dr.
Laura Dunne of OAA Orthopedic Specialists for an evaluation of left shoulder pain after
receiving a flu shot. Pet. Ex. 2 at 358. Petitioner complained of sharp, tingling pain over
the left deltoid and neck. Id. On exam, petitioner had pain over the posterior and lateral
aspect of her shoulder with abduction and during various strength, compression, and,
impingement tests. Id. An x-ray was normal and the impression was traumatic rotator
cuff tendonitis from flu shot. Id. at 359. Dr. Dunne discussed administering a steroid
injection, but instead deferred that treatment, prescribed meloxicam, and referred
petitioner to physical therapy. Id.
During follow-up examinations on February 20 and March 20, 2014, petitioner
showed some improvement on meloxicam and from regular physical therapy, but she
continued to have left shoulder pain. Pet. Ex. 2 at 347-49, 338-40. During the second
exam, Dr. Dunne expressed concern about an underlying partial tear or nerve injury and
arranged for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the left shoulder to assist with

Case 1:15-vv-00337-UNJ Document 18 Filed 08/03/15 Page 5 of 8
determining a diagnosis, and considered the possibility of performing an electromyogram
(EMG) at a later time. Pet. Ex. 2 at 339.
On March 31, 2014, petitioner returned to Dr. Dunne for ongoing shoulder pain
and to review the results of her MRI. Pet. Ex. 2 at 329-35. The MRI showed edema
within the lateral humeral head and neck, with some evidence of both supraspinatous
tendinosis and subacromial bursitis. Id. at 91; Pet. Ex. 5. Dr. Dunne ordered additional
lab tests and a bone density study and referred petitioner to orthopedist Robert Palumbo,
M.D., for a second opinion. Pet. Ex. 2 at 329.
On April 10, 2014, petitioner presented to Dr. Palumbo for an evaluation, and she
reported significant and immediate pain after receiving a flu vaccination. Pet. Ex. 2 at 7.
Dr. Palumbo noted that the bone density study revealed osteopenia of the lumbar spine,
and that the blood test results were normal. Id. The impression was “pain following a flu
injection with edema within the humeral head possibly secondary to interosseous
injection.” Id. at 8. Petitioner reported less pain and better motion since treatment began,
and Dr. Palumbo recommended that she continue physical therapy to strengthen her
shoulder. Id. at 7-8.
On April 18, 2014, petitioner underwent an EMG of the left shoulder, which was
normal with no evidence of cervical radiculopathy or brachial plexopathy. Pet. Ex. 2 at
99. Three days later, petitioner presented to Dr. Dunne for an evaluation. Dr. Dunne
opined that petitioner’s ongoing left shoulder pain “seems to stem from her
immunization.” Pet. Ex. 2 at 140. Petitioner was prescribed neurotonin for nerve pain,
which proved to be ineffective, and was referred for acupuncture for arm pain and
chiropractic treatment for low back pain. Pet. Ex. 2 at 138-40.

Case 1:15-vv-00337-UNJ Document 18 Filed 08/03/15 Page 6 of 8
After two months of chiropractic treatment for back pain and several visits for
acupuncture therapy for arm pain, petitioner returned to Dr. Dunne on June 30, 2014,
with aggravated shoulder pain. Pet. 2 at 56. Dr. Dunne noted “[petitioner’s] pain was
primarily neurologic and has responded well to acupuncture.” Id. Dr. Dunne
recommended that petitioner continue acupuncture therapy. Id.
On October 20, 2014, petitioner saw her new primary care physician, Vanessa
Eiswerth, M.D., who noted that petitioner had over ten months of left arm pain since
receiving a flu shot in December 2013, which was administered in the wrong location.
Pet. Ex. 4 at 4. It was noted that petitioner wanted to resume physical therapy and was
scheduled to follow-up with Dr. Dunne. Pet. Ex. 4 at 6.
On October 29, 2014, petitioner presented to her chiropractor for increased lower
back and left shoulder pain. After being hit in the mid back, petitioner stated that she
experienced “the left arm pain again that she had in the past.” Pet. Ex. 2 at 120. During
her treatment session, the chiropractor performed myofascial release to the left levator
scapular and lower back regions. Id. at 121.
ANALYSIS
DICP has reviewed the petition and medical records filed in the case and has
concluded that compensation is appropriate in this case. DICP has concluded that
petitioner’s alleged injury is consistent with shoulder injury related to vaccine
administration (SIRVA), and that it was caused in fact by the flu vaccine she received on
December 6, 2013. DICP did not identify any other causes for petitioner’s SIRVA, and
records show that she has suffered the sequela of her injury for more than six months.
Based on the medical records outlined above, petitioner has met the statutory

Case 1:15-vv-00337-UNJ Document 18 Filed 08/03/15 Page 7 of 8
requirements for entitlement to compensation. See 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-13(a)(1)(B); 42
U.S.C. § 300aa-11(c)(1)(D). Therefore, based on the record as it now stands, petitioner
has satisfied all legal prerequisites for compensation under the Act.
PROFFER ON AWARD OF COMPENSATION
I. Items of Compensation
Based upon the evidence of record, respondent proffers that petitioner should be
awarded $100,000.00, which represents all elements of compensation to which petitioner
would be entitled under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). Petitioner agrees.
II. Form of the Award
Respondent recommends that the compensation provided to petitioner should be
made through a lump sum payment of $100,000.00 in the form of a check payable to
petitioner.1 Petitioner agrees.
Petitioner is a competent adult. Evidence of guardianship is not required in this
case.
Respectfully submitted,
BENJAMIN C. MIZER
Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General
RUPA BHATTACHARYYA
Director
Torts Branch, Civil Division
VINCENT J. MATANOSKI
Deputy Director
Torts Branch, Civil Division
1 Should petitioner die prior to entry of judgment, the parties reserve the right to move
the Court for appropriate relief. In particular, respondent would oppose any award for
future medical expenses, future pain and suffering, and future lost wages.

Case 1:15-vv-00337-UNJ Document 18 Filed 08/03/15 Page 8 of 8
LYNN E. RICCIARDELLA
Senior Trial Attorney
Torts Branch, Civil Division
/s/Althea Walker Davis
ALTHEA WALKER DAVIS
Senior Trial Counsel
Torts Branch, Civil Division
U. S. Department of Justice
P.O. Box l46
Benjamin Franklin Station
Washington, D.C. 20044-0146
Direct dial: (202) 616-0515
Fax: (202) 616-4310
Dated: July 13, 2015

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 2: USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-00337-1
Date issued/filed: 2015-09-02
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 08/12/2015) regarding 20 DECISION Fees Stipulation/Proffer ( Signed by Special Master Denise Kathryn Vowell.)(mpj) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:15-vv-00337-UNJ Document 23 Filed 09/02/15 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 15-0337V
Filed: August 12, 2015
Unpublished
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
JENNIFER CROSSING, *
*
Petitioner, *
v. *
* Attorney Fees and Costs; Stipulation
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND * Special Processing Unit (“SPU”)
HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
Respondent. *
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Lawrence Cohan, Anapol, Schwartz, et al., Philadelphia, PA, for petitioner.
Althea Davis, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
1
DECISION ON ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS
Vowell, Chief Special Master:
On April 1, 2015, Jennifer Crossing filed a petition for compensation under the
National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq.,2 [the
“Vaccine Act” or “Program”]. The petition alleged that as a result of an Influenza (“flu”)
vaccination on December 6, 2013, petitioner suffered a shoulder injury related to
vaccine administration (“SIRVA”). On July 13, 2015, I issued a decision awarding
compensation to petitioner based on a proffer.
On August 12, 2015, the parties filed a Stipulation of Fact Concerning Attorneys’
Fees and Costs. According to the stipulation, the parties agree upon an award of
1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I intend
to post this decision on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, in accordance with the E-
Government Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-347, § 205, 116 Stat. 2899, 2913 (codified as amended at 44
U.S.C. § 3501 note (2006)). In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), petitioners have 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).

Case 1:15-vv-00337-UNJ Document 23 Filed 09/02/15 Page 2 of 2
$18,500.00 in attorneys’ fees and $1,464.76 in costs. In accordance with General
Order #9, petitioner’s counsel represents that petitioner incurred no out-of-pocket
expenses.
The Vaccine Act permits an award of reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs. 42
U.S.C. § 300 aa-15(e). I find the proposed amount to be reasonable.
3
Accordingly, I award the total of $19,964.76 as a lump sum in the form of a
check jointly payable to petitioner and petitioner’s counsel Lawrence R. Cohan.
The clerk of the court shall enter judgment in accordance herewith.4
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Denise K. Vowell
Denise K. Vowell
Chief Special Master
3 This amount is intended to cover all legal expenses incurred in this matter. This award encompasses all
charges by the attorney against a client, “advanced costs” as well as fees for legal services rendered.
Furthermore, 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(e)(3) prevents an attorney from charging or collecting fees (including
costs) that would be in addition to the amount awarded herein. See generally Beck v. Sec’y, HHS, 924
F.2d 1029 (Fed. Cir.1991).
4 Entry of judgment can be expedited by each party’s filing of a notice renouncing the right to seek review.
See Vaccine Rule 11(a).
2