VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_17-vv-01927
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_17-vv-01927
Petitioner: Kimberly Smyth
Filed: 2017-12-12
Decided: 2019-08-14
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 2016-11-25
Condition: shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA)
Outcome: compensated
Award amount USD: 87800

AI-assisted case summary:
Kimberly Smyth filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program on December 12, 2017, alleging she suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) after receiving an influenza vaccination on November 25, 2016. The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, filed a Rule 4(c) report on April 24, 2019, conceding that the petitioner's claim met the Table criteria for SIRVA. The respondent also agreed that the case was timely filed, the vaccine was received in the United States, and the petitioner satisfied the statutory severity requirement by suffering residual effects or complications for more than six months after vaccination. Additionally, the respondent noted that the petitioner had not pursued any civil action or proceedings in connection with the vaccine-related injury. Based on the respondent's concession and the evidence of record, Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey issued a ruling on entitlement on April 25, 2019, finding Ms. Smyth entitled to compensation. Subsequently, on August 14, 2019, Chief Special Master Dorsey issued a decision awarding damages. This decision was based on a joint Rule 4 report and proffer on the award of compensation, which indicated that the petitioner agreed with the proffered award. Ms. Smyth was awarded a lump sum payment of $87,800.00, payable by check to Kimberly Smyth, representing compensation for all damages available under § 15(a). Petitioner was represented by Leah VaSahnja Durant of the Law Offices of Leah V. Durant, PLLC, and respondent was represented by Ryan Daniel Pyles of the U.S. Department of Justice. The public decision does not describe the specific onset of symptoms, medical tests, treatments, or the mechanism of injury beyond it being a SIRVA.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioner Kimberly Smyth alleged a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) following an influenza vaccination on November 25, 2016. The respondent conceded that the claim met the Table criteria for SIRVA, was timely filed, the vaccine was received in the U.S., and the petitioner met the statutory severity requirement. The public text does not name specific medical experts or detail the mechanism of injury beyond SIRVA. The case resulted in an entitlement ruling on April 25, 2019, and a damages decision on August 14, 2019, awarding a lump sum of $87,800.00. Attorneys involved were Leah VaSahnja Durant for the petitioner and Ryan Daniel Pyles for the respondent. Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey presided over the case.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_17-vv-01927-0
Date issued/filed: 2019-08-07
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC ORDER/RULING (Originally filed: 04/25/2019) regarding 35 Ruling on Entitlement ( Signed by Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey. )(mpj) Service on parties made.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:17-vv-01927-UNJ Document 40 Filed 08/07/19 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 17-1927V
Filed: April 25, 2019
UNPUBLISHED
KIMBERLY SMYTH,
Petitioner, Special Processing Unit (SPU);
v. Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;
Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine;
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine
HUMAN SERVICES, Administration (SIRVA)
Respondent.
Leah VaSahnja Durant, Law Offices of Leah V. Durant, PLLC, Washington, DC, for
petitioner.
Ryan Daniel Pyles, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1
Dorsey, Chief Special Master:
On December 12, 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 she suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine
administration (“SIRVA”) after receiving an influenza (“flu”) vaccination on November 25,
2016. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office
of Special Masters.
On April 24, 2019, respondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he concedes
that petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report
1 The undersigned intends to post this ruling on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website. This
means the ruling 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 ruling 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.

Case 1:17-vv-01927-UNJ Document 40 Filed 08/07/19 Page 2 of 2
at 1. Specifically, respondent has “concluded that petitioner’s claim meets the Table
criteria for SIRVA.” Id. at 3. Respondent further agrees that “the case was timely filed,
that the vaccine was received in the United States, and that petitioner satisfies the
statutory severity requirement by suffering the residual effects or complications of her
injury for more than six months after vaccine administration”. Id. Additionally,
respondent notes that “petitioner avers that no civil action or proceedings have been
pursued in connection with the vaccine-related injury.” Id.
In view of respondent’s position and the evidence of record, the
undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to compensation.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Nora Beth Dorsey
Nora Beth Dorsey
Chief Special Master

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 2: USCOURTS-cofc-1_17-vv-01927-1
Date issued/filed: 2019-08-14
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 04/25/2019) regarding 36 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer ( Signed by Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey. )(mpj) Service on parties made.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:17-vv-01927-UNJ Document 41 Filed 08/14/19 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 17-1927V
Filed: April 25, 2019
UNPUBLISHED
KIMBERLY SMYTH,
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.
Leah VaSahnja Durant, Law Offices of Leah V. Durant, PLLC, Washington, DC, for
petitioner.
Ryan Daniel Pyles, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1
Dorsey, Chief Special Master:
On December 12, 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 she suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine
administration (“SIRVA”) after receiving an influenza (“flu”) vaccination on November 25,
2016. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office
of Special Masters.
On April 25, 2019, a ruling on entitlement was issued, finding petitioner entitled to
compensation for SIRVA. On April 24, 2019, respondent filed a combined Rule 4
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-01927-UNJ Document 41 Filed 08/14/19 Page 2 of 2
report/proffer on award of compensation (“Rule 4/Proffer”) indicating petitioner should
be awarded $87,800.00. Rule 4/Proffer at 4. In the Rule 4/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
Rule 4/Proffer.
Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Proffer, the undersigned awards
petitioner a lump sum payment of $87,800.00 in the form of a check payable to
petitioner, Kimberly Smyth. 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.
2