VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_21-vv-00695
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_21-vv-00695
Petitioner: Ruby Siddle
Filed: 2021-01-12
Decided: 2023-07-24
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 2019-12-26
Condition: shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA)
Outcome: compensated
Award amount USD: 70284

AI-assisted case summary:
Ruby Siddle 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) and/or brachial neuritis as a result of an influenza vaccine received on December 26, 2019. The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, filed a combined Rule 4(c) Report and Proffer on July 24, 2023. In this report, the respondent conceded that Petitioner was entitled to compensation for SIRVA, which is a Table injury, but not for brachial neuritis. The respondent also agreed that Petitioner met all legal prerequisites for compensation under the Act. Petitioner's counsel was Ronald Craig Homer of Conway, Homer, P.C., and respondent's counsel was Steven Santayana of the U.S. Department of Justice. Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran issued a Ruling on Entitlement on July 24, 2023, finding Petitioner entitled to compensation based on the respondent's concession and the evidence of record. Subsequently, on July 24, 2023, Chief Special Master Corcoran issued a Decision on Damages. The parties agreed to an award of $70,284.23. This amount includes a lump sum of $70,000.00 for pain and suffering and $284.23 for actual unreimbursable expenses, payable to Petitioner by check. This award represents compensation for all damages available under Section 15(a) of the Vaccine Act. The public decision does not describe the specific onset of symptoms, medical tests, treatments, or expert witnesses.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioner Ruby Siddle alleged a Table shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) and/or brachial neuritis following an influenza vaccine on December 26, 2019. The respondent conceded entitlement for SIRVA, a Table injury, but not for brachial neuritis. Petitioner met all legal prerequisites for compensation. Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran issued a Ruling on Entitlement on July 24, 2023, finding Petitioner entitled to compensation based on the respondent's concession. A Decision on Damages was issued on July 24, 2023, awarding $70,284.23 ($70,000.00 for pain and suffering, $284.23 for actual unreimbursable expenses) as a lump sum payable to Petitioner. The public text does not detail the specific mechanism of injury, expert testimony, or clinical findings beyond the diagnosis of SIRVA.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_21-vv-00695-0
Date issued/filed: 2023-08-24
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC ORDER/RULING (Originally filed: 07/24/2023) regarding 50 Ruling on Entitlement. Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. (tlf) Service on parties made.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:21-vv-00695-UNJ Document 55 Filed 08/24/23 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 21-0695V
RUBY SIDDLE, Chief Special Master Corcoran
Petitioner,
v. Filed: July 24, 2023
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES,
Respondent.
Ronald Craig Homer, Conway, Homer, P.C., Boston, MA, for Petitioner.
Steven Santayana, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1
On January 12, 2021, Ruby Siddle (“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 Table shoulder injury related to
vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) and/or brachial neuritis as a result of an influenza (“flu”)
vaccine on December 26, 2019. Petition (ECF No. 1) at 1; see also Amended Petition
filed April 20, 2022 (ECF No. 26). The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit
of the Office of Special Masters.
On July 24, 2023, Respondent filed a combined Rule 4(c) Report and Proffer in
which he concedes that Petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent’s
Rule 4(c) Report and Proffer at 1. Specifically, Respondent states that compensation is
appropriate for SIRVA, but not brachial neuritis. Id. at 1, 7. Petitioner’s alleged injury is
1 Because this Ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action taken in this case, it must be made
publicly accessible and will be posted on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, and/or at
https://www.govinfo.gov/app/collection/uscourts/national/cofc, in accordance with the E-Government Act of
2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2018) (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 1:21-vv-00695-UNJ Document 55 Filed 08/24/23 Page 2 of 2
consistent with SIRVA as defined by the Vaccine Injury Table (the “Table”). Id. at 7 (citing
42 C.F.R. §§ 100.3(a)(XIV)(B), (c)(10)). Respondent further agrees that Petitioner has
satisfied all legal prerequisites for compensation under the Act. Id. at 7 (citing Section
13(a)(1)(B); Section 11(c)(1)(D)(i)).
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_21-vv-00695-1
Date issued/filed: 2023-08-25
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 07/24/2023) regarding 51 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer. Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. (tlf) Service on parties made.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:21-vv-00695-UNJ Document 56 Filed 08/25/23 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 21-0695V
RUBY SIDDLE, Chief Special Master Corcoran
Petitioner,
v. Filed: July 24, 2023
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES,
Respondent.
Ronald Craig Homer, Conway, Homer, P.C., Boston, MA, for Petitioner.
Steven Santayana, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
DECISION ON DAMAGES1
On January 12, 2021, Ruby Siddle (“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 Table shoulder injury related to
vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) and/or brachial neuritis as a result of an influenza (“flu”)
vaccine on December 26, 2019. Petition (ECF No. 1) at 1; see also Amended Petition
filed April 20, 2022 (ECF No. 26). The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit
of the Office of Special Masters.
On July 24, 2023, Respondent filed a combined Rule 4(c) Report and Proffer in
which he conceded that Petitioner was entitled to compensation for a Table SIRVA, but
not brachial neuritis. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report and Proffer at 1, 7. That same day,
I issued a Ruling on Entitlement.
1 Because this Decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action taken in this case, it must be made
publicly accessible and will be posted on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, and/or at
https://www.govinfo.gov/app/collection/uscourts/national/cofc, in accordance with the E-Government Act of
2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2018) (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-00695-UNJ Document 56 Filed 08/25/23 Page 2 of 2
Respondent represents that Petitioner agrees to his proffer on an award of
compensation. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report and Proffer at 7-8. 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 combined Rule 4(c) Report and Proffer,3 I award
the following compensation:
A lump sum of $70,284.23 (representing $70,000.00 for pain and suffering,
and $284.23 for actual unreimbursable expenses) in the form of a check payable to
Petitioner. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report and Proffer at 7-8. This amount represents
compensation for all damages that would be available under Section 15(a). Id.
The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this decision.4
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Brian H. Corcoran
Brian H. Corcoran
Chief Special Master
3 Because the combined Rule 4(c) Report and Proffer contains information regarding Petitioner’s personal
medical history, which is not generally included in a Proffer when separately filed, it is not attached hereto.
4 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