VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_21-vv-00667
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_21-vv-00667
Petitioner: Erin Elliott
Filed: 2021-01-12
Decided: 2023-05-15
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 2019-10-15
Condition: shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA)
Outcome: dismissed
Award amount USD: 

AI-assisted case summary:
Erin Elliott filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program on January 12, 2021, alleging she suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) from an influenza vaccine received on October 15, 2019. After filing, Ms. Elliott conducted an investigation and determined she would be unable to prove entitlement to compensation. She subsequently filed a motion requesting the dismissal of her petition, acknowledging that proceeding further would be unreasonable and would waste the resources of the court, the respondent, and the Vaccine Program. The court noted that to receive compensation, a petitioner must prove either a Table Injury or that the injury was actually caused by a covered vaccine, and demonstrate statutory severity. The record did not contain sufficient medical records or a medical opinion to demonstrate entitlement. Consequently, the Chief Special Master denied Ms. Elliott's claim for compensation and dismissed the case for insufficient proof, resulting in a judgment against her.

Theory of causation field:
unclear

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_21-vv-00667-0
Date issued/filed: 2023-05-15
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 04/13/2023) regarding 34 DECISION of Special Master. Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. (kle) Service on parties made.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:21-vv-00667-UNJ Document 39 Filed 05/15/23 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 21-0667V
UNPUBLISHED
ERIN ELLIOTT, Chief Special Master Corcoran
Petitioner, Filed: April 13, 2023
v.
Special Processing Unit (SPU);
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND Petitioner’s Motion for a Decision
HUMAN SERVICES, Dismissing Petition; Influenza (Flu)
Vaccine; Shoulder Injury Related to
Respondent. Vaccine Administration (SIRVA)
Jessi Carin Huff, Maglio Christopher & Toale, PA, Seattle, WA, for Petitioner.
Madelyn Weeks, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
DECISION1
On January 12, 2021, Erin Elliott 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”) resulting from an influenza vaccine received on October 15,
2019. Petition at 1-4. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit (“SPU”) of
the Office of Special Masters.
On April 12, 2023, Petitioner filed a motion for a dismissal decision, acknowledging
that she will be unable to demonstrate entitlement to compensation. Petitioner’s Motion
for Decision Dismissing Petition, filed April 12, 2023, at *1 (ECF No. 33). Petitioner states
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 1:21-vv-00667-UNJ Document 39 Filed 05/15/23 Page 2 of 2
that “[a] thorough investigation of the facts subsequent to filing has demonstrated to
petitioner that she will be unable to prove that she is entitled to compensation under the
Vaccine Program.” Id. Under these circumstances, Petitioner states that “to proceed
further would be unreasonable and would waste the resources of the Court, the
Respondent, and the Vaccine Program.” Id. at 2. Thus, Petitioner requests dismissal,
stating, “Petitioner understands that a decision by the Special Master dismissing their
petition will result in a judgment against them. They have been advised that such a
judgment will end all of their rights in the Vaccine Program.” Id.
To receive compensation under the Vaccine Act, Petitioner must prove either
1) that she suffered a “Table Injury” – i.e., an injury falling within the Vaccine Injury Table
– corresponding to a covered vaccine, or 2) that she suffered an injury that was actually
caused by a covered vaccine. See §§ 13(a)(1)(A) and 11(c)(1). A petitioner must also
demonstrate that the injury satisfies the statutory severity requirement. Id. at
§ 11(c)(1)(D). Examination of the record does not disclose that Petitioner is able to satisfy
these requirements.
Under the Vaccine Act, a petitioner may not be awarded compensation based on
the petitioner’s claims alone. Rather, the petition must be supported by either the medical
records or by a medical opinion. § 13(a)(1). In this case, the record does not contain
medical records or a medical opinion sufficient to demonstrate entitlement to
compensation. For these reasons, and in accordance with § 12(d)(3)(A), Petitioner’s
claim for compensation is DENIED and this case is DISMISSED for insufficient
proof. The Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly.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