VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_22-vv-00380
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_22-vv-00380
Petitioner: Douglas Berman
Filed: 2022-06-02
Decided: 2025-07-02
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 2020-10-12
Condition: left shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA)
Outcome: compensated
Award amount USD: 51740

AI-assisted case summary:
Douglas Berman filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, alleging he suffered a left shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) resulting from an influenza vaccine he received on October 12, 2020. The case proceeded as a Table claim, with the petitioner arguing entitlement under 42 C.F.R. § 100.3(c)(10) and seeking $80,000.00 for pain and suffering and $1,740.00 for medical expenses. The respondent disputed that the petitioner established a Table claim, specifically contesting whether the shoulder pain began within 48 hours of vaccination. The court found that the petitioner had established the 48-hour onset requirement for SIRVA, as well as all other Table requirements and additional requirements under Section 11(c). Consequently, the court awarded Douglas Berman a total of $51,740.00, comprising $50,000.00 for pain and suffering and $1,740.00 for out-of-pocket medical expenses.

Theory of causation field:
Table

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_22-vv-00380-0
Date issued/filed: 2025-07-02
Pages: 3
Docket text: PUBLIC ORDER/RULING (Originally filed: 06/02/2025) regarding 33 Ruling on Entitlement, DECISION of Special Master, Order on Motion for Ruling on the Record. Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. (cr) Service on parties made.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:22-vv-00380-UNJ Document 39 Filed 07/02/25 Page 1 of 3
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 22-0380V
DOUGLAS BERMAN,
Chief Special Master Corcoran
Petitioner,
v. Filed: June 2, 2025
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES,
Respondent.
Paul R. Brazil, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA, for Petitioner.
Austin Joel Egan, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
RULING ON ENTITLEMENT AND DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1
On April 1, 2022, Douglas Berman 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 a left shoulder injury related to vaccine
administration (“SIRVA”) resulting from an influenza (“flu”) vaccine administered to him
on October 12, 2020. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit
of the Office of Special Masters. Because entitlement was contested, the parties were
ordered to file briefs addressing whether Petitioner had established a Table case, and
setting forth their respective arguments on damages should I find entitlement in favor of
1 Because this Ruling and 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 (2018).

Case 1:22-vv-00380-UNJ Document 39 Filed 07/02/25 Page 2 of 3
Petitioner. The parties were subsequently notified that I would resolve this dispute via an
expedited “Motions Day” hearing, which ultimately took place on May 30, 2025.
Petitioner argues he has established a Table claim for SIRVA pursuant to 42
C.F.R. § 100.3(c)(10) and seeks an award of $80,000.00, in compensation for Petitioner’s
actual pain and suffering and $1,740.00 for reimbursement of his out-of-pocket medical
expenses.
Respondent disputes that Petitioner has established a Table claim for SIRVA.
Specifically, Respondent argues Petitioner has failed to establish that his shoulder pain
began within 48 hours of vaccine administration pursuant to 42 C.F.R. § 100.3(a)(XIV)(B).
If I find that Petitioner has established a Table case, Respondent recommends an award
of $47,500.00.3
A. Entitlement
After listening to the arguments of both sides, I issued an oral ruling on entitlement
and damages constituting my findings of fact and conclusions of law, pursuant to Section
12(d)(3)(A). An official recording of the proceeding was taken by a court reporter, although
a transcript has not yet been filed in this matter. I hereby fully adopt and incorporate that
oral ruling as officially recorded. And as discussed during my oral ruling, in another recent
decision I discussed at length the legal standards to be considered in determining
entitlement and damages and prior discussions in Sections II and III of Friberg v. Sec’y
Health & Hum. Servs., No. 19-1727V, 2022 WL 3152827 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. July 6,
2022) to the instant Ruling and Decision. I incorporate herein Sections II and III of the
prior discussion in that decision to the instant ruling and decision. to the instant ruling and
decision. Additionally, the official recording of my oral ruling includes my discussion of
various comparable cases as well as specific facts relating to Petitioner’s medical history
and experience that further informed my decision awarding entitlement and damages
herein.
B. Damages
Based on my consideration of the complete record as a whole and for the reasons
discussed in my oral ruling, pursuant to Section 12(d)(3)(A), I find that Petitioner has
established that he satisfied the 48-hour onset requirement for SIRVA, as well as all other
SIRVA Table requirements pursuant to 42 C.F.R. § 100.3(c)(10). Additionally, Petitioner
has established the additional requirements of Section 11(c), i.e., receipt of a covered
3 During the hearing, Respondent stated that he does not contest the amount Petitioner has requested for
unreimbursable medical expenses. Thus, I will award the amount requested by Petitioner, $1,740.00.
2

Case 1:22-vv-00380-UNJ Document 39 Filed 07/02/25 Page 3 of 3
vaccine, residual effects of injury lasting six months, etc. See generally §
11(c)(1)(A)(B)(D)(E). I therefore find that Petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case
and that $50,000.00, represents a fair and appropriate amount of compensation for
Petitioner’s actual pain and suffering.4 I also find that Petitioner is entitled to $1,740.00,
in actual unreimbursable expenses.
Accordingly, I award Petitioner a lump sum payment of $51,740.00
(consisting of $50,000.00 for Petitioner’s pain and suffering, and $1,740.00, for
Petitioner’s out-of-pocket medical expenses) to be paid through an ACH deposit to
Petitioner’s counsel’s IOLTA account for prompt disbursement to Petitioner. This
amount represents compensation for all damages that would be available under Section
15(a).
The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this Decision.5
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Brian H. Corcoran
Brian H. Corcoran
Chief Special Master
4 Since this amount is being awarded for actual, rather than projected, pain and suffering, no reduction to
net present value is required. See Section 15(f)(4)(A); Childers v. Sec’y of Health & Hum. Servs., No. 96-
0194V, 1999 WL 159844, at *1 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Mar. 5, 1999) (citing Youngblood v. Sec’y of Health &
Hum. Servs., 32 F.3d 552 (Fed. Cir. 1994)).
5 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.
3