VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_22-vv-01755
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_22-vv-01755
Petitioner: Justin Hargett
Filed: 2022-12-10
Decided: 2025-02-05
Vaccine: flu
Vaccination date: 2020-11-04
Condition: shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA)
Outcome: dismissed
Award amount USD: 

AI-assisted case summary:
Justin Hargett filed a petition alleging that a flu vaccine received on November 4, 2020, caused a Table injury of shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA). The respondent contested entitlement, arguing that the records did not specify the injection arm, that the pain was not limited to the left shoulder, that other conditions could explain the symptoms, and that symptom onset did not occur within the required 48-hour window. Following a conference, the petitioner agreed to dismiss the Table SIRVA claim, acknowledging that the pain radiated to his left arm and neck, which did not meet the SIRVA criteria of pain being limited to the shoulder. The Chief Special Master dismissed the Table SIRVA claim, and the case was transferred out of the Special Processing Unit to pursue an off-Table claim for causation-in-fact.

Theory of causation field:
Table

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_22-vv-01755-0
Date issued/filed: 2025-02-05
Pages: 4
Docket text: PUBLIC ORDER/RULING (Originally filed: 12/10/2024) regarding 33 Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law ( Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. )(mpj) Service on parties made.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:22-vv-01755-UNJ Document 39 Filed 02/05/25 Page 1 of 4
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 22-1755V
JUSTIN HARGETT, Chief Special Master Corcoran
Petitioner, Filed: December 10, 2024
v.
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES,
Respondent.
Michael G. McLaren, Black McLaren Jones Ryland & Griffee, P.C., Memphis, TN, for
Petitioner.
Emilie Williams, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW DISMISSING TABLE CLAIM1
On December 1, 2022, Justin Hargett filed a petition for compensation under the
National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq.2 (the
“Vaccine Act”), alleging that as a result of his receipt of a flu vaccine on November 4,
2020, he suffered a Table injury – shoulder injury related to vaccine administration
(“SIRVA”). Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the
Office of Special Masters (the “SPU”) in October 2023.
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 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-01755-UNJ Document 39 Filed 02/05/25 Page 2 of 4
Respondent filed his Rule 4(c) Report on October 11, 2024, setting forth objections
to compensation in this case. ECF No. 29. In sum, Respondent asserts that Petitioner
has failed to establish that he suffered the Table injury of SIRVA, because (a) the records
do not indicate in which arm Petitioner received the vaccination; (b) the records reveal
Petitioner’s pain and reduced range of motion were not limited to his left shoulder; (c) the
records indicate the existence of other conditions and abnormalities that would explain
his condition; and (d) Petitioner has not demonstrated the onset of his symptoms occurred
within the 48-hour period following vaccination prescribed by the Table. Id. at 9-10.
Respondent also maintains that Petitioner cannot establish a Non-Table Injury based on
the Althen factors.3 Id. at 10-11.
On November 14, 2024, I conducted a Rule 5 conference in this matter and
advised the parties that based upon my preliminary review of the records, a SIRVA claim
was not likely tenable (although Petitioner may be able to establish an off-Table claim).
ECF No. 31. I nevertheless encouraged the parties to determine if this claim could be
informally resolved, since the matter would be allowed to continue as a causation-in-fact
claim regardless of how the Table claim was resolved. Id. I also asked Petitioner to
consider voluntarily dismissing the Table claim (and stated that if this occurred, I would
immediately transfer the matter out of SPU). Id. Otherwise, I advised I would permit the
parties to submit briefs regarding the issue of whether Petitioner had established a SIRVA
Table claim. Id
On December 2, 2024, Petitioner filed a joint status report on behalf of the parties
stating that the parties remained at an impasse in their informal discussions to resolve
this case. ECF No. 32. Petitioner further stated that in follow-up to the Rule 5 Conference
in this matter, he “agrees to the dismissal of his SIRVA Table claim and he intends to
pursue an off-Table claim outside of the SPU” and requests reassignment for further
proceedings. Id.
The criteria for establishing a Table SIRVA are as follows:
Shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA). SIRVA manifests
as shoulder pain and limited range of motion occurring after the
administration of a vaccine intended for intramuscular administration in the
upper arm. These symptoms are thought to occur as a result of unintended
3 To be successful on a causation-in-fact claim, petitioners must show preponderant evidence of “(1) a
medical theory causally connecting the vaccination to the injury; (2) a logical sequence of cause and effect
showing the vaccination was the reason for the injury; and (3) a showing of a proximate temporal
relationship between the vaccination and the injury.” Althen v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 418 F.3d
1274, 1278 (Fed. Cir. 2005).
2

Case 1:22-vv-01755-UNJ Document 39 Filed 02/05/25 Page 3 of 4
injection of vaccine antigen or trauma from the needle into and around the
underlying bursa of the shoulder resulting in an inflammatory reaction.
SIRVA is caused by an injury to the musculoskeletal structures of the
shoulder (e.g. tendons, ligaments, bursae, etc.). SIRVA is not a neurological
injury and abnormalities on neurological examination or nerve conduction
studies (NCS) and/or electromyographic (EMG) studies would not support
SIRVA as a diagnosis (even if the condition causing the neurological
abnormality is not known). A vaccine recipient shall be considered to have
suffered SIRVA if such recipient manifests all of the following:
(i) 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;
(ii) Pain occurs within the specified time-frame;
(iii) Pain and reduced range of motion are limited to the shoulder in which
the intramuscular vaccine was administered; and
(iv) No other condition or abnormality is present that would explain the
patient’s symptoms (e.g. NCS/EMG or clinical evidence of radiculopathy,
brachial neuritis, mononeuropathies, or any other neuropathy).
42 C.F.R. § 100.3(c)(10).
As discussed at the Rule 5 Conference in this matter, although disputes about situs
and onset might be resolved in Petitioner’s favor, Respondent’s other objections present
a bigger hurdle. ECF No. 31. The record shows that Petitioner reported numerous
symptoms occurring outside his left shoulder area - and which were not isolated, but
rather intertwined with Petitioner’s shoulder symptoms. Indeed, at Petitioner’s first post-
vaccination medical visit to urgent care (five days after vaccination) he reported “[l]eft
upper chest pain radiates: left arm and neck.” Ex. 3 at 20 (emphasis added). Many other
records are consistent.4
Given the foregoing, Petitioner cannot demonstrate the third SIRVA QAI criteria.
42 C.F.R. § 100.3(c)(10)(iii) (“Pain and reduced range of motion are limited to the shoulder
in which the intramuscular vaccine was administered.”). Accordingly, dismissal of
Petitioner’s Table SIRVA claim is warranted, as consented to by Petitioner – and the
matter may proceed outside of SPU as a causation-in-fact claim.
4 Additionally, some of Petitioner’s medical providers proposed that Petitioner was likely suffering from a
cervical radiculopathy. See Ex. 3 at 73, 81.
3

Case 1:22-vv-01755-UNJ Document 39 Filed 02/05/25 Page 4 of 4
Accordingly, for the above stated reasons I find5 that Petitioner has failed to
demonstrate all Table requirements for SIRVA (42 C.F.R. § 100.3(c)(10)), and hereby
dismiss Petitioner’s Table SIRVA claim. I will proceed with transferring Petitioner’s
case out of SPU and will randomly reassign the case to a special master to conduct further
proceedings to establish whether Petitioner has demonstrated an off-Table case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Brian H. Corcoran
Brian H. Corcoran
Chief Special Master
5 I make these findings after a complete review of the record, including all medical records, affidavits, and
all other additional evidence and filings from the parties.
4