VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-01092
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-01092
Petitioner: Loren Neddeau
Filed: 2016-01-14
Decided: 2016-02-04
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 2012-10-06
Condition: Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (“SIRVA”)
Outcome: compensated
Award amount USD: 

AI-assisted case summary:
Petitioner Loren Neddeau filed a petition on January 14, 2016, seeking compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. She alleged that she developed Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA) as a result of receiving an influenza vaccine on October 6, 2012. The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, reviewed the case and, in its Rule 4(c) Report, conceded that the petitioner's alleged injury was consistent with SIRVA and was caused in fact by the flu vaccine administered on October 6, 2012. The respondent further noted that no other causes for the SIRVA were identified and that the petitioner's injury resulted in sequelae lasting more than six months. Based on the respondent's concession and a review of the record, Special Master Brian H. Corcoran found that Ms. Neddeau is entitled to compensation for an injury caused by a covered vaccine. A separate order for damages was to be issued. Petitioner was represented by Stephen M. Reck, and respondent was represented by Gordon Shemin. The decision was issued on February 4, 2016.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioner Loren Neddeau alleged SIRVA after an influenza vaccine on October 6, 2012. Respondent conceded the injury was consistent with SIRVA, caused in fact by the vaccine, and that no other causes were identified, with sequelae lasting over six months. The Special Master, Brian H. Corcoran, found entitlement based on this concession. The theory of causation was "Off-Table." Petitioner counsel was Stephen M. Reck, and respondent counsel was Gordon Shemin. The decision date was February 4, 2016.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-01092-0
Date issued/filed: 2016-02-04
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 1/14/2016) regarding 13 Ruling on Entitlement. Signed by Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. (ag) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:15-vv-01092-UNJ Document 15 Filed 02/04/16 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 15-1092V
Not to be Published
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*
LOREN NEDDEAU, * Special Master Corcoran
*
Petitioner, * Filed: January 14, 2016
*
v. *
* Entitlement; Shoulder Injury Related to
SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Vaccine Administration (“SIRVA”);
AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Influenza (“Flu”) Vaccine; Conceded.
*
Respondent. *
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Stephen M. Reck, The Law Firm of Stephen M. Reck, LLC, North Stonington, CT, for Petitioner.
Gordon Shemin, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
RULING FINDING ENTITLEMENT1
On September 29, 2015, Petitioner Loren Neddeau filed a petition seeking compensation
under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.2 Petitioner alleges that she developed
Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (“SIRVA”) as a result of the influenza (“flu”)
vaccine that she received on October 6, 2012.
1 Because this ruling contains a reasoned explanation for my actions in this case, I will 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 (Dec. 17, 2002) (current version at 44 U.S.C. § 3501 (2014)). As provided by 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-
12(d)(4)(B), however, the parties may object to the published rulings inclusion of certain kinds of confidential
information. Specifically, under Vaccine Rule 18(b), 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). Otherwise, the whole ruling will be available to the public. Id.
2 The Vaccine Program comprises Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660,
100 Stat. 3758, codified as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-10 through 34 (2012) (“Vaccine Act” or “the Act”).
Individual section references hereafter will be to § 300aa of the Act.

Case 1:15-vv-01092-UNJ Document 15 Filed 02/04/16 Page 2 of 2
In her Rule 4(c) Report, Respondent indicated that the Petitioner’s claim is compensable
under the Vaccine Act. Respondent specifically stated that the Division of Vaccine Injury
Compensation (“DVIC”), Department of Health and Human Services, has reviewed the facts of
this case and has concluded that “[P]etitioner’s alleged injury is consistent with SIRVA, and that
it was caused in fact by the flu vaccine she received on October 6, 2012.” Rule 4(c) Report at 3
(ECF No. 12). Additionally, the Rule 4(c) report acknowledges that “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.” Id. Respondent therefore concludes that Petitioner is entitled to
an award of damages.
In view of Respondent’s concession, and based on my own review of the record (see
Section 13(a)(1); 42 C.F.R. § 100.3 (a)(I)), I find that Petitioner is entitled to compensation for an
injury that was caused-in-fact by a covered vaccine. 42 C.F.R. §§ 100.3(a)(XIV), 100.3(b)(2). A
separate damages order will issue shortly.
Any questions may be directed to my law clerk, Andrea Gordon, at (202) 357-6345.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/ Brian H. Corcoran
Brian H. Corcoran
Special Master
2

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 2: USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-01092-1
Date issued/filed: 2016-06-28
Pages: 4
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 05/23/2016) Regarding 18 DECISION Proffer (Signed by Special Master Brian H. Corcoran). (ay) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:15-vv-01092-UNJ Document 25 Filed 06/28/16 Page 1 of 4
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 15-1092V
(Not to be Published)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
LOREN NEDDEAU, *
* Filed: May 23, 2016
Petitioner, *
*
v. * Decision by Proffer; Damages;
* Influenza (“Flu”) Vaccine;
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND * Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine
HUMAN SERVICES, * Administration (“SIRVA”).
*
Respondent. *
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Stephen M. Reck, The Law Firm of Stephen M. Reck, LLC, North Stonington, CT, for Petitioner.
Gordon Elliot Shemin, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1
On September 28, 2015, Loren Neddeau filed a petition seeking compensation under the
National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.2 ECF No. 1. Petitioner alleged that he suffered
from a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) as a result of receiving the
influenza (“flu”) vaccination on October 6, 2012.
Thereafter, on January 14, 2016, Respondent filed her Rule 4(c) report indicating that after
reviewing the facts of this case, as reflected in the petition and accompany documents, the medical
personnel of the Division of Injury Compensation Programs (“DICP”), Department of Health and
1 Because this decision contains a reasoned explanation for my actions in this case, I will 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 (2012). As
provided by 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-12(d)(4)(B), however, the parties may object to the decision’s inclusion of certain
kinds of confidential information. Specifically, under Vaccine Rule 18(b), each party has fourteen 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). Otherwise, the whole decision will
be available to the public. Id.
2 The Vaccine Program comprises Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660,
100 Stat. 3758, codified as amended at 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-10 through 34 (2012) (“Vaccine Act” or “the Act”).
Individual section references hereafter will be to § 300aa of the Act (but will omit that statutory prefix).

Case 1:15-vv-01092-UNJ Document 25 Filed 06/28/16 Page 2 of 4
Human Services determined that it was appropriate for compensation under the terms of the Act.
ECF No. 12. I subsequently issued an entitlement decision on January 14, 2016. ECF No. 13.
On May 20, 2016, Respondent filed a proffer proposing an award of compensation. I have
reviewed the file, and based upon that review I conclude that the Respondent’s proffer (as attached
hereto) is reasonable. I therefore adopt it as my decision in awarding damages on the terms set
forth therein.
The proffer awards:
 A lump sum payment of $300,000.00, in the form of a check payable to Petitioner.
This amount represent compensation for all elements of compensation under 42 U.S.C. §
300aa-15(a) to which Petitioner is entitled.
I approve a Vaccine Program award in the requested amount set forth above to be made to
Petitioner. In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the clerk of
the Court is directed to enter judgment herewith.3
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/ Brian H. Corcoran
Brian H. Corcoran
Special Master
3 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties may expedite entry of judgment by each filing (either jointly or separately)
a notice renouncing their right to seek review.
2

Case 1:15-vv-01092-UNJ Document 25 Filed 06/28/16 Page 3 of 4
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
____________________________________
)
LOREN NEDDEAU, )
)
Petitioner, )
) No. 15-1092V
v. ) Special Master Corcoran
) ECF
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND )
HUMAN SERVICES, )
)
Respondent. )
)
PROFFER ON AWARD OF COMPENSATION
I. Items of Compensation
Based upon the evidence of record, respondent proffers that petitioner should be awarded
$300,000.00, 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 $300,000.00 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.
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-01092-UNJ Document 25 Filed 06/28/16 Page 4 of 4
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
LINDA S. RENZI
Senior Trial Counsel
Torts Branch, Civil Division
/s/ Gordon Shemin
GORDON SHEMIN
Trial Attorney
Torts Branch, Civil Division
U.S. Department of Justice
P.O. Box 146
Benjamin Franklin Station
Washington, D.C. 20044-0146
Phone: (202) 616-4208
Dated: May 20, 2016 Fax: (202) 353-2988