VICP Registry Case Source Bundle Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_16-vv-00069 Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_16-vv-00069 Petitioner: Shirley Grossman Filed: 2016-01-12 Decided: 2016-05-19 Vaccine: pneumococcal conjugate vaccine Vaccination date: 2015-03-12 Condition: shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) Outcome: compensated Award amount USD: 70632 AI-assisted case summary: Shirley Grossman filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, alleging that she suffered significant aggravation of a prior shoulder injury following the administration of the Prevnar 13 vaccine on March 12, 2015. She stated that she received the vaccination in the United States and suffered residual effects for more than six months without receiving other compensation. The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, filed a Rule 4(c) report and Proffer on Damages, conceding that the case was appropriate for compensation. The respondent concluded that petitioner's injury was consistent with a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) and was caused in fact by the vaccine. The respondent also agreed that petitioner met all legal prerequisites for compensation and proffered an award of $70,632.51, which petitioner accepted. Based on the respondent's concession and the evidence, the Chief Special Master found petitioner entitled to compensation and awarded her a lump sum of $70,632.51. Theory of causation field: Table Public staged source text: ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_16-vv-00069-0 Date issued/filed: 2016-05-19 Pages: 2 Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 04/07/2016) regarding 13 Ruling on Entitlement, DECISION Stipulation/Proffer ( Signed by Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey. )(mpj) Copy to parties. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:16-vv-00069-UNJ Document 20 Filed 05/19/16 Page 1 of 2 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 16-69V Filed: April 7, 2016 Unpublished * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * SHIRLEY GROSSMAN, * * Ruling on Entitlement; Damages Petitioner, * Decision Based on Proffer; Concession; * Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine; * Prevnar 13 Vaccine; Shoulder Injury SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Related to Vaccine Administration; AND HUMAN SERVICES, * (“SIRVA”); Significant Aggravation; * Special Processing Unit (“SPU”) Respondent. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Maximillian Muller, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA, for petitioner. Gordon Shemin, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent. RULING ON ENTITLEMENT AND DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES 1 Dorsey, Chief Special Master: On January 12, 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” or “Program”). Petitioner alleges that she suffered significant aggravation of a prior shoulder injury following the administration of the Prevnar 13 vaccine (a pneumococcal conjugate vaccine) on March 12, 2015. Petition at 1. Petitioner further alleges that she received the vaccination in the United States, suffered the residual effects of the significant aggravation for more than six months, and neither she nor anyone else has received compensation for her significant aggravation. Id. at ¶¶ 3, 17, 20. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters. On April 7, 2016, respondent filed her Rule 4(c) report and Proffer on Damages in which she concedes that that the case is appropriate for compensation. 1 Because this unpublished ruling and 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 (2012)). 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 1:16-vv-00069-UNJ Document 20 Filed 05/19/16 Page 2 of 2 Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report and Proffer on Damages at 1. Specifically, respondent “has concluded that petitioner’s injury is consistent with a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA), and that it was caused in fact by the pneumococcal conjugate vaccine administered on March 12, 2015.” Id. at 3. Respondent further agrees that “petitioner has satisfied all legal prerequisites for compensation under the Act.” Id. at 4. Additionally, “[r]espondent proffers that petitioner should be awarded $70,632.51, which represents all elements of compensation to which petitioner would be entitled under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a).” Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report and Proffer on Damages at 4. Respondent represents that petitioner agrees with the proffered award. Id. In view of respondent’s concession and the evidence before me, the undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to compensation. Further, based on the record as a whole, the undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to an award as stated in Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report and Proffer on Damages. Pursuant to the terms stated in Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report and Proffer on Damages, the undersigned awards petitioner a lump sum payment of $70,632.51 in the form of a check payable to petitioner, Shirley Grossman. 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 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.