VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_17-vv-00397
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_17-vv-00397
Petitioner: James Baumann
Filed: 2017-03-21
Decided: 2019-06-12
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 2015-11-19
Condition: shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA)
Outcome: compensated
Award amount USD: 81857

AI-assisted case summary:
James Baumann filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, alleging that he suffered a left shoulder injury resulting from an influenza vaccine administered on November 19, 2015. The case was initially handled by the Special Processing Unit. Respondent argued that Mr. Baumann had a prior history of shoulder pain and that the onset of his current pain did not occur within 48 hours of vaccination, as he did not seek treatment until three months later and did not initially associate his pain with the vaccine. However, after a fact hearing where Mr. and Mrs. Baumann testified, the Chief Special Master found their testimony credible and consistent with the medical records. The court determined that Mr. Baumann had no prior history of left shoulder pain, that his pain and reduced range of motion were limited to the left shoulder where the vaccine was administered, and that there was no other condition that would explain his symptoms. Crucially, the court found that the onset of his symptoms occurred within 48 hours of vaccination, despite the delay in seeking treatment, which was attributed to his lack of health insurance at the time. Because SIRVA became a Table injury effective March 21, 2017, and Mr. Baumann's injury met the criteria, he was found entitled to compensation. Subsequently, the parties reached a stipulation for damages. The court awarded Mr. Baumann a total of $81,857.17, comprising $80,000.00 for pain and suffering and $1,857.17 for past unreimbursed expenses.

Theory of causation field:
Table

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_17-vv-00397-0
Date issued/filed: 2018-10-17
Pages: 6
Docket text: PUBLIC ORDER/RULING (Originally filed: 07/30/2018) regarding 50 Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law, Ruling on Entitlement ( Signed by Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey. )(mpj) Service on parties made.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:17-vv-00397-UNJ Document 56 Filed 10/17/18 Page 1 of 6
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 17-397V
Filed: July 30, 2018
UNPUBLISHED
JAMES BAUMANN,
Special Processing Unit (SPU);
Petitioner, Ruling on Entitlement; Table Injury;
v. Influenza (Flu) Vaccine; Shoulder
Injury Related to Vaccine
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND Administration (SIRVA)
HUMAN SERVICES,
Respondent.
Amy A. Senerth, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA, for petitioner.
Linda Sara Renzi, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
FINDING OF FACT AND RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1
Dorsey, Chief Special Master:
On March 21, 2017, 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 he suffered left shoulder injuries resulting from
adverse effects of an influenza (“flu”) vaccine administered November 19, 2015.
Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of
Special Masters. Following a fact hearing held in the case, the undersigned finds that
petitioner suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”), the
onset of which occurred within 48 hours or vaccination. Accordingly, the undersigned
further finds that petitioner is entitled to compensation for a Table Injury of SIRVA
following receipt of a flu vaccine.
1 Because this unpublished ruling 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. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of
Electronic Government Services). 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).
1

Case 1:17-vv-00397-UNJ Document 56 Filed 10/17/18 Page 2 of 6
I. Procedural History
The petition in this case was filed on March 21, 2017, along with exhibits marked
1-5, including a vaccination record as well as medical records from Beth Family Health
(Dr. Chamberlain), Dr. Kuhn, and Bethel Physical Therapy. Additional medical records
from prior to petitioner’s injury-causing vaccination were later filed as Exhibit 7 on June
6, 2017. Affidavits by petitioner marked as Exhibits 6 and 8 were filed on March 27,
2017, and June 7, 2017, respectively.
On December 11, 2017, respondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he argued
that this case is not appropriate for compensation. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report at 1.
Specifically, respondent asserted that “petitioner had a prior history of shoulder pain one
year before receiving his flu vaccine. In addition, petitioner cannot establish that the
onset of his shoulder pain occurred within forty-eight hours of the receipt of his
November 19, 2015 flu vaccine. Petitioner did not seek treatment or report any
shoulder pain until February 2016, three months after his vaccine. Significantly, at that
time, he did not associate his flu vaccine with the onset of his shoulder pain during
multiple medical visits . . . It was not until five months post-vaccine that petitioner began
to report that the onset of his shoulder pain occurred immediately after his November
19, 2015 flu vaccine, apparently after finding information about SIRVA [shoulder injury
related to vaccine administration] on the internet.” Id. at 5 (internal citations omitted).
On March 15, 2018, petitioner filed additional witness affidavits by Denise
Baumann as well as petitioner’s employers, Amy and Edward Yasko. (ECF Nos. 34-35.)
A video fact hearing was subsequently held on May 9, 2018. Mr. and Mrs.
Baumann testified. See Transcript of Proceedings (“Tr.”) held May 31, 2018 (ECF No.
45).
II. Summary of Relevant Medical Records3
Petitioner received a flu vaccine in his left arm on November 19, 2014. Ex. 9, p.
1. Three months later, on February 17, 2016, petitioner presented to his primary care
physician (Dr. Chamberlain) with, inter alia, a complaint of shoulder pain. Ex. 2, p. 18.
The history of present illness is marked only “M.M.” Exam revealed painful range of
motion and petitioner was referred to physical therapy. Id. Petitioner returned to Dr.
Chamberlain on March 2, 2016, for a follow-up regarding his shoulder pain. Ex. 2, p. 21.
Petitioner was given physical therapy and orthopedic referrals. Id. A further visit on
March 30, 2017, reflected ongoing shoulder pain. Ex. 2, p. 28.
On April 11, 2016, petitioner presented for a physical therapy evaluation. Ex. 2,
pp. 37-38. Petitioner reported that he developed left shoulder pain following a flu
3 The following is an abbreviated history of petitioner’s medical records as most relevant to determining
the onset of his shoulder injury. However, the undersigned has reviewed the entirety of petitioner’s
medical records and considered the whole record in reaching her findings.
2

Case 1:17-vv-00397-UNJ Document 56 Filed 10/17/18 Page 3 of 6
vaccine in November.4 He indicated that he had done internet research on the subject.
Id. Petitioner was assessed as having poor active range of motion due to pain. Id.
On May 17, 2016, petitioner reported to his physician that he had seen no
improvement after one month of physical therapy. Ex. 2, p. 31. He was referred to an
orthopedist and further physical therapy. Id. He attended four more physical therapy
sessions, reporting minimal improvement. Id. at 41.
On June 27, 2016, petitioner was seen by an orthopedist (Dr. Kuhn). Ex. 3, p.
13-15. Petitioner reported that he had “pain since he got a flu shot in November 2015,
pain much worse with movement and very sharp at times.”5 Id. at 13. Petitioner had
positive signs of impingement and was diagnosed as having inflammation of the rotator
cuff, either bursitis or tendonitis. Id. at 15.
Previously, petitioner had reported a workplace injury in September of 2014 that
resulted in shoulder pain. Ex. 7, p. 32. The notation did not mark whether the right or
left shoulder was impacted. Id. Petitioner was recommended ibuprofen and to avoid
lifting heavy objects for two weeks. Id. No further notations regarding this shoulder pain
are included in any of petitioner’s medical records.
Petitioner’s medical records also indicate that petitioner established care with Dr.
Chamberlain on August 4, 2015, after relocating from England (Ex. 2, p. 6), but that he
did not gain health insurance until January 1, 2016 (Ex. 4, p. 35). A notation on
November 19, 2015, indicated that at that time petitioner was still looking for insurance.
Ex. 2, p. 14.
III. Fact Hearing and Findings of Fact
In addition to the above medical records, the undersigned heard testimony from
petitioner, James Baumann, and his wife, Denise Baumann. The undersigned felt that
Mr. and Mrs. Baumann credibly explained Mr. Baumann’s prior pre-vaccination report of
shoulder pain as well as the facts and circumstances of his vaccine injury and his
subsequent pattern of treatment for that injury. Among other things, the Baumanns
testified that Mr. Baumann experienced pain immediately following his vaccination as
well as limitations in motion immediately or within a week, but that he did not seek
immediate medical care due in large part to his lack of health insurance. Tr. 18, 32-33,
43-44, 59-60. He also testified that he told Dr. Chamberlain he believed his pain was
caused by his vaccination, but that she was not receptive to that explanation. Tr. 40, 62-
4 The therapist included an onset date of 11/01/2015 in the record, though his notes do not reflect that
petitioner provided a specific date of vaccination. Nor is a specific vaccination date listed on the patient
questionnaire completed by petitioner at that time. Ex. 4, p. 27. The history provided indicates that
“Patient reports that he has been experiencing left shoulder pain following a flu shot in November.” Ex. 2,
p. 37.
5 At a different point in his record, Dr. Kuhn misplaces the injurious vaccination as having occurred four
months prior, which would place it in February of 2016. Ex. 3, p. 14. In all instances, however, Dr. Kuhn
notes that petitioner reported the onset of his shoulder pain as related to the flu shot, occurring “ever
since” the vaccination.
3

Case 1:17-vv-00397-UNJ Document 56 Filed 10/17/18 Page 4 of 6
63. The undersigned found the testimony to be consistent with and well corroborated by
the medical records.
At the conclusion of the hearing, the undersigned read her findings of fact into
the record as follows:
After having reviewed all of the exhibits, the medical records, the record of
the orthopedist and physical therapist and heard the testimony today as
well as seen the demonstration by Mr. Baumann, I issue the following
findings of fact:
The issues requiring this fact hearing today are whether the onset of
Petitioner’s symptoms occurred within 48 hours, in light of the fact there
was a delay in seeking medical treatment. The time period for the first
manifestation of symptoms for a shoulder injury related to vaccine
administration, under the rules and regulations which govern the Vaccine
Program is less than 18 or equal to 48 hours. I find that the date of
vaccination was November 19th, 2015, and I find that the location or site
of administration was the left arm. I base that on the medical records and
the testimony given today.
A vaccine recipient shall have considered to have suffered SIRVA, or
shoulder injury related to vaccine administration, if the recipient manifests
the following: First, no history of pain, inflammation or dysfunction of the
affected shoulder prior to IM vaccine administration that would explain the
alleged signs, symptoms, examination findings and/or diagnostic studies
occurring after the vaccine injection.
With regard to the first criteria, I find that Mr. Baumann had no history of
pain, inflammation or dysfunction of his left shoulder prior to flu vaccine
administration. His medical records do contain entry of a shoulder injury,
which occurred in 2014.6 Mr. Baumann and his wife have testified today
that that occurred in his right shoulder and explained the facts and
circumstances of that prior injury. That appeared to be a limited injury, and
based on the testimony and the medical records, it appeared to involve his
right shoulder and not his left shoulder. I find that Mr. Baumann had no
prior left shoulder injury or problem and no history of pain, inflammation or
dysfunction of his left shoulder which would explain his condition.
The next criteria is that the pain occurred within the specified time frame of
48 hours. As to onset, I find that based on the Petitioner’s testimony here
today and the documentation by Dr. Kuhn, Dr. Chamberlain and the
physical therapist, that he had his onset within 48 hours.7 I also find that
based on the testimony of Denise Baumann, and I find her testimony on
that issue to be credible.
6 See Ex. 5, p. 59.
7 See, e.g. Ex. 2, pp. 18, 21, 28, 37-38; Ex. 3, pp. 13-15.
4

Case 1:17-vv-00397-UNJ Document 56 Filed 10/17/18 Page 5 of 6
The next criteria is that the pain and reduced range of motion be limited to
the shoulder in which the IM vaccine was administered. Based on the
medical records from the orthopedic -- orthopedist,8 the physical therapist9
and the testimony here today, I find that Petitioner’s pain and reduced
range of motion are limited to his left shoulder, in which the vaccine was
administered. I also find that based on the testimony Mr. and Mrs.
Baumann given here today.
The next criteria is that there be no other condition or abnormality that
would explain the patient’s symptoms. Based on my review of all of the
medical records and the testimony given here today, I find there is no
other condition or abnormality that would explain Mr. Baumann’s
symptoms.
This concludes my findings.
Tr. 78-80.
IV. Ruling on Entitlement
Effective for petitions filed beginning on March 21, 2017, a shoulder injury related
to vaccine administration, or “SIRVA,” is an injury listed on the Vaccine Injury Table
(“Table”). See National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program: Revisions to the
Vaccine Injury Table, Final Rule, 82 Fed. Reg. 6294, Jan. 19, 2017; National Vaccine
Injury Compensation Program: Revisions to the Vaccine Injury Table, Delay of Effective
Date, 82 Fed. Reg. 11321, Feb. 22, 2017 (delaying the effective date of the final rule
until March 21, 2017). Pursuant to the Vaccine Injury Table, a SIRVA is compensable if
it manifests within 48 hours of the administration of a flu vaccine. 42 C.F.R. § 100.3(a).
The criteria establishing a SIRVA under the accompanying Qualifications and Aids to
Interpretation are as follows:
A vaccine recipient shall be considered to have suffered SIRVA if such
recipient manifests all of the following: (i) No history of pain, inflammation
or dysfunction of the affected shoulder prior to intramuscular vaccine
administration that would explain the alleged signs, symptoms,
examination findings, and/or diagnostic studies occurring after vaccine
injection; (ii) Pain occurs within the specified time-frame; (iii) Pain and
reduced range of motion are limited to the shoulder in which the
intramuscular vaccine was administered; and (iv) No other condition or
abnormality is present that would explain the patient’s symptoms (e.g.
NCS/EMG or clinical evidence of radiculopathy, brachial neuritis,
mononeuropathies, or any other neuropathy).
42 C.F.R. § 100.3(b)(10).
8 See Ex. 3.
9 See Ex. 4.
5

Case 1:17-vv-00397-UNJ Document 56 Filed 10/17/18 Page 6 of 6
In view of the evidence of record and the above factual findings, the
undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to compensation for a SIRVA.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Nora Beth Dorsey
Nora Beth Dorsey
Chief Special Master
6

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 2: USCOURTS-cofc-1_17-vv-00397-1
Date issued/filed: 2019-06-12
Pages: 4
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 04/05/2019) regarding 65 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer ( Signed by Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey. )(mpj) Service on parties made.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:17-vv-00397-UNJ Document 71 Filed 06/12/19 Page 1 of 4
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 17-397V
Filed: April 5, 2019
UNPUBLISHED
JAMES BAUMANN,
Petitioner,
Special Processing Unit (SPU);
v.
Damages Decision Based on Proffer;
Influenza (Flu) Vaccine; Shoulder
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND
Injury Related to Vaccine
HUMAN SERVICES,
Administration (SIRVA)
Respondent.
Amy A. Senerth, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA, for petitioner.
Linda Sara Renzi, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1
Dorsey, Chief Special Master:
On March 21, 2017, 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 he suffered left shoulder injuries resulting from
adverse effects of an influenza (“flu”) vaccine administered November 19, 2015.
Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of
Special Masters.
On July 30, 2018, a ruling on entitlement was issued, finding petitioner entitled to
compensation for a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”). On April
5, 2019, respondent filed a proffer on award of compensation (“Proffer”) indicating
1 The undersigned intends to post this decision on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website.
This means the decision 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 decision 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).
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 1:17-vv-00397-UNJ Document 71 Filed 06/12/19 Page 2 of 4
petitioner should be awarded $81,857.17, representing $80,000.00 in compensation for
pain and suffering and $1,857.17 in compensation for past unreimbursed expenses.
Proffer at 1. In the Proffer, respondent represented that petitioner agrees with the
proffered award. Id. 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 $81,857.17, representing $80,000.00 in
compensation for pain and suffering and $1,857.17 in compensation for past
unreimbursed expenses, in the form of a check payable to petitioner, James
Baumann. 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.

Case 1:17-vv-00397-UNJ Document 71 Filed 06/12/19 Page 3 of 4
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
JAMES BAUMANN, )
)
Petitioner, ) No. 17-397V
) Chief Special Master
v. ) Nora Beth Dorsey
) ECF
SECRETARY OF HEALTH )
AND HUMAN SERVICES, )
)
Respondent. )
)
RESPONDENT’S PROFFER ON AWARD OF COMPENSATION
I. Compensation for Vaccine Injury-Related Items
On July 30, 2018, the Chief Special Master issued a Ruling on Entitlement finding
that petitioner was entitled to vaccine compensation for his Shoulder Injury Related to
Vaccine Administration (“SIRVA”). Respondent proffers that based on the evidence of
record, petitioner should be awarded $81,857.17 (constituting $80,000.00 in pain and
suffering, and $1,857.17 in past unreimbursed expenses).1 This amount represents all
elements of compensation to which petitioner would be entitled under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-
15(a)(1); 15(a)(3)(A); and 15(a)(4). Petitioner agrees.
1 However, respondent reserves his right, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-12(e), to seek
review of the Chief Special Master’s July 30, 2018, entitlement decision.

Case 1:17-vv-00397-UNJ Document 71 Filed 06/12/19 Page 4 of 4
II. Form of the Award
The parties recommend that the compensation provided to petitioner should be
made through a lump sum payment as described below, and request that the Chief Special
Master’s decision and the Court’s judgment award the following:2
A lump sum payment of $81,857.17, in the form of a check payable to
petitioner, James Baumann. This amount accounts for all elements of
compensation under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a) to which petitioner would be
entitled.
Petitioner is a competent adult. Evidence of guardianship is not required in this case.
Respectfully submitted,
JOSEPH H. HUNT
Assistant Attorney General
C. SALVATORE D’ALESSIO
Acting Director
Torts Branch, Civil Division
CATHARINE E. REEVES
Deputy Director
Torts Branch, Civil Division
HEATHER L. PEARLMAN
Assistant Director
Torts Branch, Civil Division
/s/ Linda S. Renzi
LINDA S. RENZI
Senior Trial Counsel
Torts Branch, Civil Division
U.S. Department of Justice
P.O. Box 146
Benjamin Franklin Station
Washington, D.C. 20044-0146
Dated: April 5, 2019 Tel.: (202) 616-4133
2 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 lost earnings, and future pain and suffering.