VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-00605
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-00605
Petitioner: Merry Moore
Filed: 2015-09-30
Decided: 2016-02-17
Vaccine: Tdap
Vaccination date: 2012-08-09
Condition: shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA)
Outcome: compensated
Award amount USD: 115000

AI-assisted case summary:
Merry Moore filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, alleging that a Tetanus-Diphtheria-acellular Pertussis (Tdap) vaccination on August 9, 2012, caused her to suffer a shoulder injury. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit. The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, conceded entitlement to compensation, determining that Ms. Moore suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) in her right shoulder, caused by the Tdap vaccine. The respondent also confirmed that the injury was not due to unrelated factors and that the statutory sequela requirement was met. Based on this concession and the evidence, the Chief Special Master issued a ruling on entitlement. Subsequently, the parties filed a proffer on award of compensation, with the respondent recommending an award of $115,000.00, which Ms. Moore agreed to. The court awarded Ms. Moore a lump sum payment of $115,000.00. Additionally, the parties filed a stipulation for attorneys' fees and costs, agreeing to an award of $14,112.47, which was also granted by the court. This total award of $115,000.00 represents compensation for all damages available under the Vaccine Act.

Theory of causation field:
Table

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-00605-0
Date issued/filed: 2015-11-13
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC ORDER/RULING (Originally filed: 09/30/2015) regarding 14 Ruling on Entitlement ( Signed by Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey.)(mpj) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:15-vv-00605-UNJ Document 18 Filed 11/13/15 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 15-605V
Filed: September 30, 2015
Unpublished
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
MERRY MOORE, *
*
Petitioner, * Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;
* Tetanus-Diphtheria-acellular Pertussis
* (“Tdap”) Vaccine; Shoulder Injury
SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Related to Vaccine Administration
AND HUMAN SERVICES, * (“SIRVA”); Special Processing Unit
* (“SPU”)
Respondent. *
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Paul R. Brazil, Muller Brazil, LLP, for petitioner.
Ann Martin, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1
Dorsey, Chief Special Master:
On June 15, 2015, Merry Moore 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”]. Petitioner alleges that as a result of a Tetanus-Diphtheria-
acellular Pertussis [“Tdap”] vaccination on August 9, 2012, she suffered a shoulder
injury. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the
Office of Special Masters.
On September 30, 2015, 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, 4. Specifically, respondent indicates that she “has determined that
petitioner suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (‘SIRVA’) in her
right shoulder, which was caused in fact by the administration of a Tdap vaccine on
1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I intend to
post it 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 (2012).

Case 1:15-vv-00605-UNJ Document 18 Filed 11/13/15 Page 2 of 2
August 9, 2012.” Id. at 1. Respondent further indicates that petitioner’s “shoulder injury
is not due to factors unrelated to the administration of this vaccine” and that “the
statutory six month sequela requirement has been satisfied.” Id. at 4.
In view of respondent’s concession and the evidence before me, I find that
petitioner is entitled to compensation.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Nora Beth Dorsey
Nora Beth Dorsey
Chief Special Master
2

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 2: USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-00605-1
Date issued/filed: 2016-02-17
Pages: 4
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 11/17/2015) regarding 20 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer ( Signed by Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey.)(mpj) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:15-vv-00605-UNJ Document 28 Filed 02/17/16 Page 1 of 4
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 15-605V
Filed: November 17, 2015
Unpublished
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
MERRY MOORE, *
*
Petitioner, * Damages Decision Based on Proffer;
* Tetanus-Diphtheria-acellular Pertussis
* (“Tdap”) Vaccine; Shoulder Injury
SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Related to Vaccine Administration
AND HUMAN SERVICES, * (“SIRVA”); Special Processing Unit
* (“SPU”)
*
Respondent. *
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Paul R. Brazil, Muller Brazil, LLP, for petitioner.
Ann Martin, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1
Dorsey, Chief Special Master:
On June 15, 2015, petitioner, Merry Moore, 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”]. Petitioner alleges that as a result of a Tetanus-
Diphtheria-acellular Pertussis [“Tdap”] vaccination on August 9, 2012, she suffered a
shoulder injury. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of
the Office of Special Masters.
On September 30, 2015, a ruling on entitlement was issued, finding petitioner
entitled to compensation for SIRVA. On November 17, 2015, respondent filed a proffer
on award of compensation [“Proffer”] indicating petitioner should be awarded
$115,000.00. Proffer at 1. In the Proffer, respondent represented that petitioner agrees
1 Because this unpublished decision 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, 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, the undersigned agrees that the identified material fits
within this definition, the undersigned 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-00605-UNJ Document 28 Filed 02/17/16 Page 2 of 4
with the proffered award. Based on the record as a whole, the undersigned finds that
petitioner is entitled to an award as stated in the Proffer.
Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Proffer, the undersigned awards
petitioner a lump sum payment of $115,000.00 in the form of a check payable to
petitioner, Merry Moore. This amount represents compensation for all damages that
would be available under § 300aa-15(a).
The clerk of the court is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this
decision.3
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Nora Beth Dorsey
Nora Beth Dorsey
Chief Special Master
3 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment can be expedited by the parties’ joint filing of notice
renouncing the right to seek review.
2

Case 1:15-vv-00605-UNJ Document 28 Filed 02/17/16 Page 3 of 4
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
____________________________________
)
MERRY MOORE, )
)
Petitioner, )
) No. 15-605V
v. ) Chief Special Master Dorsey
) ECF
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND )
HUMAN SERVICES, )
)
Respondent. )
____________________________________)
RESPONDENT’S PROFFER ON AWARD OF COMPENSATION
I. Items of Compensation
Based upon the evidence of record, respondent proffers that petitioner should be awarded
$115,000.00, which represents all elements of compensation to which petitioner would be
entitled under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a).1 Petitioner agrees.
II. Form of the Award
The parties recommend that the compensation provided to petitioner should be made
through a lump sum payment of $115,000.00 in the form of a check payable to petitioner.
Petitioner agrees.
Respectfully submitted,
BENJAMIN C. MIZER
Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General
RUPA BHATTACHARYYA
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 pain and
suffering.

Case 1:15-vv-00605-UNJ Document 28 Filed 02/17/16 Page 4 of 4
VINCENT J. MATANOSKI
Deputy Director
Torts Branch, Civil Division
MICHAEL P. MILMOE
Senior Trial Counsel
Torts Branch, Civil Division
s/ ANN D. MARTIN
ANN D. MARTIN
Senior Trial Attorney
Torts Branch, Civil Division
U.S. Department of Justice
P.O. Box 146
Benjamin Franklin Station
Washington, D.C. 20044-0146
Tel.: (202) 307-1815
DATED: November 17, 2015
2

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 3: USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-00605-2
Date issued/filed: 2016-02-23
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 11/19/2015) regarding 23 DECISION Fees Stipulation/Proffer (Signed by Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey.)(mpj) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:15-vv-00605-UNJ Document 29 Filed 02/23/16 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 15-605V
Filed: November 19, 2015
UNPUBLISHED
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
MERRY MOORE, *
*
Petitioner, *
v. *
* Attorneys’ Fees and Costs; Stipulation
SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Special Processing Unit (“SPU”)
AND HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
Respondent. *
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Paul R. Brazil, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA, for petitioner.
Ann Donohue Martin, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
DECISION ON ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS1
Dorsey, Chief Special Master:
On June 15, 2015, 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 alleged that she suffered a shoulder injury as the result of an Tetanus-
Diphtheria-acellular Pertussis [“Tdap”] vaccination. On November 17, 2015, the
undersigned issued a decision awarding compensation to petitioner based on the
parties’ Proffer.
On November 18, 2015, the parties filed a Stipulation of Fact Concerning
Attorneys’ Fees and Costs. According to the stipulation, the parties stipulate to an
award of $14,112.47. In accordance with General Order #9, petitioner’s counsel
represents that petitioner incurred no out-of-pocket expenses.
1 Because this unpublished decision 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, 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, the undersigned agrees that the identified material fits
within this definition, the undersigned 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-00605-UNJ Document 29 Filed 02/23/16 Page 2 of 2
The Vaccine Act permits an award of reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs. 42
U.S.C. § 300 aa-15(e). Based on the reasonableness of petitioner’s request and the
lack of any objection by respondent, the undersigned GRANTS the request for approval
and payment of attorneys’ fees and costs.
Accordingly, the undersigned awards the total of $14,112.473 as a lump
sum in the form of a check jointly payable to petitioner and petitioner’s counsel,
Paul R. Brazil.
The clerk of the court shall enter judgment in accordance herewith.4
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Nora Beth Dorsey
Nora Beth Dorsey
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 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment can be expedited by the parties’ joint filing of notice
renouncing the right to seek review.
2