VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_20-vv-00942
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_20-vv-00942
Petitioner: Erin Mattheis
Filed: 2020-07-31
Decided: 2021-11-22
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 2019-10-07
Condition: Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA)
Outcome: compensated
Award amount USD: 90000

AI-assisted case summary:
Erin Mattheis filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, alleging she suffered a Table injury, Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA), as a result of her October 7, 2019 influenza vaccination. The petition was filed on July 31, 2020. Respondent conceded that Petitioner is entitled to compensation, agreeing that her claim met the Table criteria for SIRVA, including no prior history of shoulder issues, onset of pain within 48 hours of vaccination, and pain limited to the injected shoulder. Respondent also confirmed the case was timely filed, the vaccine was received in the United States, and Petitioner met the statutory severity requirement. On October 7, 2021, a ruling on entitlement found Petitioner entitled to compensation. Subsequently, on October 14, 2021, Respondent filed a proffer agreeing to an award of $90,000.00 for pain and suffering, which Petitioner accepted. The decision dated November 22, 2021, awarded Erin Mattheis a lump sum payment of $90,000.00 for pain and suffering.

Theory of causation field:
Table

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_20-vv-00942-0
Date issued/filed: 2021-11-09
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC ORDER/RULING (Originally filed: 10/07/2021) regarding 28 Ruling on Entitlement Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. (sw) Service on parties made.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:20-vv-00942-UNJ Document 35 Filed 11/09/21 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 20-942V
UNPUBLISHED
ERIN MATTHEIS, Chief Special Master Corcoran
Petitioner, Filed: October 7, 2021
v.
Special Processing Unit (SPU);
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;
HUMAN SERVICES, Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine;
Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine
Respondent. Administration (SIRVA)
Jeffrey S. Pop, Jeffrey S. Pop & Associates, Beverly Hills, CA, for Petitioner.
Christine Mary Becer, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1
On July 31, 2020, Erin Mattheis 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 Table injury – Shoulder Injury Related to
Vaccine Administration (“SIRVA”) as a result of her October 7, 2019 influenza (“flu”)
vaccination. Petition at 1. Petitioner further alleges the vaccine was administered within
the United States, that she suffered the residual effects of her injury for more than six
months, and that there has been no prior award or settlement of a civil action on her
behalf as a result of her injury. See Petition at 1 (Preamble), ¶¶ 30, 32. The case was
assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.
1 Because this unpublished Ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am 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). 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, 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 section references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. §
300aa (2012).

Case 1:20-vv-00942-UNJ Document 35 Filed 11/09/21 Page 2 of 2
On October 4, 2021, 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 at
1. Specifically, Respondent indicates that
DICP [or the Division of Injury Compensation Programs, Department of
Health and Human Services] has reviewed the facts of this case and
concluded that petitioner’s claim meets the Table criteria for SIRVA.
Specifically, petitioner had 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; she suffered the onset
of pain within forty-eight hours of vaccine administration; her pain and
reduced range of motion were limited to the shoulder in which the
intramuscular vaccine was administered; and there is no other condition or
abnormality present that would explain petitioner’s symptoms. 42 C.F.R. §
100.3(a), (c)(10). Therefore, petitioner is entitled to a presumption of
vaccine causation.
Id. at 4. Respondent further agrees that
[w]ith respect to other statutory and jurisdictional issues, the records show
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. See 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-11(c)(1)(D)(i).
Petitioner avers that no civil action or proceedings have been pursued in
connection with the vaccine-related injury. See 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-11(a)(5)
and -11(c)(1)(E). Thus, in light of the information contained in petitioner’s
medical records and affidavit, respondent concedes that entitlement to
compensation is appropriate under the terms of the Vaccine Act.
Id. at 4-5.
In view of Respondent’s position and the evidence of record, I find that
Petitioner is entitled to compensation.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Brian H. Corcoran
Brian H. Corcoran
Chief Special Master
2

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 2: USCOURTS-cofc-1_20-vv-00942-1
Date issued/filed: 2021-11-22
Pages: 5
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 10/15/2021) regarding 31 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. (sw) Service on parties made.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:20-vv-00942-UNJ Document 36 Filed 11/22/21 Page 1 of 5
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 20-942V
UNPUBLISHED
ERIN MATTHEIS, Chief Special Master Corcoran
Petitioner, Filed: October 15, 2021
v.
Special Processing Unit (SPU);
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND Damages Decision Based on Proffer;
HUMAN SERVICES, Influenza (Flu) Vaccine; Shoulder
Injury Related to Vaccine
Respondent. Administration (SIRVA)
Jeffrey S. Pop, Jeffrey S. Pop & Associates, Beverly Hills, CA, for Petitioner.
Christine Mary Becer, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1
On July 31, 2020, Erin Mattheis 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 Table injury – Shoulder Injury Related to
Vaccine Administration (“SIRVA”) as a result of her October 7, 2019 influenza (“flu”)
vaccination. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the
Office of Special Masters.
On October 7, 2021, a ruling on entitlement was issued, finding Petitioner entitled
to compensation for SIRVA. On October 14, 2021, Respondent filed a proffer on award
of compensation (“Proffer”) indicating Petitioner should be awarded $90,000.00 for pain
and suffering. Proffer at 1-2. In the Proffer, Respondent represented that Petitioner
1 Because this unpublished Decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am
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). 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, 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 section references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. §
300aa (2012).

Case 1:20-vv-00942-UNJ Document 36 Filed 11/22/21 Page 2 of 5
agrees with the proffered award. Id. Based on the record as a whole, I find that Petitioner
is entitled to an award as stated in the Proffer.
Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Proffer, I award Petitioner a lump
sum payment of $90,000.00, for pain and suffering, in the form of a check payable
to Petitioner. This amount represents compensation for all damages that would be
available under Section 15(a).
The clerk of the court is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this
decision.3
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Brian H. Corcoran
Brian H. Corcoran
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 1:20-vv-00942-UNJ Document 36 Filed 11/22/21 Page 3 of 5
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
____________________________________
)
ERIN MATTHEIS, )
)
Petitioner, )
) No. 20-942V
v. ) Chief Special Master Corcoran
) ECF
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND )
HUMAN SERVICES, )
)
Respondent. )
____________________________________)
RESPONDENT’S PROFFER ON AWARD OF COMPENSATION
I. Procedural History
On October 4, 2021, respondent filed a Vaccine Rule 4(c) report concluding that
petitioner sustained the onset of a left shoulder injury related to vaccine administration
(“SIRVA”) within the Table time period following an influenza vaccine, and therefore sustained
an injury that is compensable under the terms of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of
1986, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§300aa-10 to -34. ECF No. 26. Accordingly, on October 7, 2021,
the Chief Special Master issued a Ruling on Entitlement, finding that petitioner was entitled to
vaccine compensation for SIRVA following the influenza vaccine she received on October 7,
2019. ECF No. 28.
II. Items of Compensation
Respondent proffers that petitioner should be awarded $90,000.00 for pain and suffering.
This represents all elements of compensation to which petitioner is entitled under 42
U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). Petitioner agrees.

Case 1:20-vv-00942-UNJ Document 36 Filed 11/22/21 Page 4 of 5
III. Form of the Award
Petitioner is a competent adult. Evidence of guardianship is not required in this case.
Respondent recommends that the compensation provided to petitioner should be made through a
lump sum payment as described below and requests that the Chief Special Master’s decision and
the Court’s judgment award the following1: a lump sum payment of $90,000.00, in the form of a
check payable to petitioner.
IV. Summary of Recommended Payments Following Judgment
Lump sum payable to petitioner, Erin Mattheis: $90,000.00
Respectfully submitted,
BRIAN M. BOYNTON
Acting Assistant Attorney General
C. SALVATORE D’ALESSIO
Acting Director
Torts Branch, Civil Division
HEATHER L. PEARLMAN
Deputy Director
Torts Branch, Civil Division
DARRYL R. WISHARD
Assistant 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.
2

Case 1:20-vv-00942-UNJ Document 36 Filed 11/22/21 Page 5 of 5
s/Christine Mary Becer
CHRISTINE MARY BECER
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) 616-3665
Christine.m.becer@usdoj.gov
DATED: October 14, 2021
3