VICP Registry Case Source Bundle Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_23-vv-01871 Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_23-vv-01871 Petitioner: Patricia Dietrich Filed: 2023-10-24 Decided: 2025-04-08 Vaccine: influenza Vaccination date: 2022-10-04 Condition: shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) Outcome: compensated Award amount USD: 55052 AI-assisted case summary: Patricia Dietrich filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, alleging that she suffered a Table injury, specifically shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA), as a result of an influenza vaccination received on October 4, 2022. She further alleged that she suffered the residual effects of her injury for more than six months. The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, filed a Rule 4(c) report conceding that the petitioner's alleged injury was consistent with SIRVA as defined by the Vaccine Injury Table. The respondent noted that Ms. Dietrich had no prior history of shoulder issues, that her pain occurred within forty-eight hours after the vaccination, that the pain and reduced range of motion were limited to the shoulder of injection, and that no other condition explained her symptoms. Based on the respondent's concession and the evidence of record, the Chief Special Master issued a ruling on entitlement, finding Ms. Dietrich entitled to compensation. Subsequently, the respondent filed a proffer on award of compensation, indicating that Ms. Dietrich should be awarded $55,000.00 for pain and suffering and $52.77 for past unreimbursable expenses, which Ms. Dietrich agreed to. The court awarded a lump sum payment of $55,052.77. Theory of causation field: Table Public staged source text: ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_23-vv-01871-0 Date issued/filed: 2024-10-22 Pages: 2 Docket text: PUBLIC ORDER/RULING (Originally filed: 09/20/2024) regarding 16 Ruling on Entitlement ( Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. )(mpj) Service on parties made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:23-vv-01871-UNJ Document 19 Filed 10/22/24 Page 1 of 2 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 23-1871V PATRICIA DIETRICH, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: September 20, 2024 v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Leah VaSahnja Durant, Law Offices of Leah V. Durant, PLLC, Washington, DC, for Petitioner. Bridget Corridon, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1 On October 24, 2023, Patricia Dietrich 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 the result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccination received on October 4, 2022. Petition at 1. Petitioner further alleges , that she suffered the residual effects of her injury for more than six months, and that there has been no prior award or settlement on her behalf as a result of her injury. Petition at ¶¶ 8-9. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters. 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 (2018). Case 1:23-vv-01871-UNJ Document 19 Filed 10/22/24 Page 2 of 2 On September 18, 2024, 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 has concluded that petitioner’s alleged injury is consistent with SIRVA as defined by the Vaccine Injury Table. Specifically, petitioner had no history of pain, inflammation, or dysfunction of her right shoulder prior to vaccination; pain occurred within forty-eight hours after receipt of an intramuscular vaccination; pain and reduced range of motion was limited to the shoulder in which the vaccine was administered; and no other condition or abnormality has been identified to explain petitioner’s shoulder pain. 42 C.F.R. §§ 100.3(a), (c)(10). Additionally, based on the medical records outlined above, petitioner suffered the residual effects of her condition for more than six months. Id. at 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_23-vv-01871-cl-extra-10733936 Date issued/filed: 2024-10-22 Pages: 1 Docket text: Supplementary opinion from CourtListener cluster 10267346 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 23-1871V PATRICIA DIETRICH, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: September 20, 2024 v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Leah VaSahnja Durant, Law Offices of Leah V. Durant, PLLC, Washington, DC, for Petitioner. Bridget Corridon, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1 On October 24, 2023, Patricia Dietrich 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 the result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccination received on October 4, 2022. Petition at 1. Petitioner further alleges , that she suffered the residual effects of her injury for more than six months, and that there has been no prior award or settlement on her behalf as a result of her injury. Petition at ¶¶ 8-9. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters. 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 (2018). On September 18, 2024, 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 has concluded that petitioner’s alleged injury is consistent with SIRVA as defined by the Vaccine Injury Table. Specifically, petitioner had no history of pain, inflammation, or dysfunction of her right shoulder prior to vaccination; pain occurred within forty-eight hours after receipt of an intramuscular vaccination; pain and reduced range of motion was limited to the shoulder in which the vaccine was administered; and no other condition or abnormality has been identified to explain petitioner’s shoulder pain. 42 C.F.R. §§ 100.3(a), (c)(10). Additionally, based on the medical records outlined above, petitioner suffered the residual effects of her condition for more than six months. Id. at 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 3: USCOURTS-cofc-1_23-vv-01871-1 Date issued/filed: 2025-04-08 Pages: 5 Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 02/28/2025) regarding 24 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer ( Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. )(mpj) Service on parties made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:23-vv-01871-UNJ Document 28 Filed 04/08/25 Page 1 of 5 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 23-1871V PATRICIA DIETRICH, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: February 28, 2025 v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Leah VaSahnja Durant, Law Offices of Leah V. Durant, PLLC, Washington, DC, for Petitioner. Elizabeth Andary, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1 On October 24, 2023, Patricia Dietrich 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 the result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccination received on October 4, 2022. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters. On September 20, 2024, a ruling on entitlement was issued, finding Petitioner entitled to compensation for SIRVA. On February 21, 2025, Respondent filed a proffer on award of compensation (“Proffer”) indicating Petitioner should be awarded $55,000.00 for pain and suffering and $52.77 for past unreimbursable expenses. Proffer at 1-2. In the 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 (2018). Case 1:23-vv-01871-UNJ Document 28 Filed 04/08/25 Page 2 of 5 Proffer, Respondent represented that Petitioner 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 $55,052.77 (representing $55,000.00 for pain and suffering and $52.77 for past unreimbursable 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.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 1:23-vv-01871-UNJ Document 28 Filed 04/08/25 Page 3 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS PATRICIA DIETRICH, Petitioner, v. No. 23-1871V Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND ECF HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. RESPONDENT’S PROFFER ON AWARD OF COMPENSATION On October 24, 2023, Patricia Dietrich (“petitioner”) filed a petition for compensation under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 to -34 (“Vaccine Act” or “Act”), as amended, alleging that she suffered a Table shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”), as the result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccination received on October 4, 2022. Petition at 1. On September 18, 2024, the Secretary of Health and Human Services (“respondent”) filed a Rule 4(c) Report indicating that this case is appropriate for compensation under the terms of the Act for a SIRVA Table injury. ECF No. 15. On September 20, 2024, the Chief Special Master issued a Ruling on Entitlement finding petitioner entitled to compensation. ECF No. 16. I. Items of Compensation A. Pain and Suffering Based upon the evidence of record, respondent proffers that petitioner should be awarded a lump sum of $55,000.00 for pain and suffering. Petitioner agrees. Case 1:23-vv-01871-UNJ Document 28 Filed 04/08/25 Page 4 of 5 B. Past Unreimbursable Expenses Evidence supplied by petitioner documents that she incurred past unreimbursable expenses related to her vaccine-related injury. Respondent proffers that petitioner should be awarded past unreimbursable expenses in the amount of $52.77. See 42 U.S.C. § 300aa- 15(a)(1)(B). Petitioner agrees. These amounts represent all elements of compensation to which petitioner is entitled under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). Petitioner agrees. II. 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 $55,052.77, to be paid through an ACH deposit to petitioner’s counsel’s IOLTA account for prompt disbursement to petitioner. III. Summary of Recommended Payments Following Judgment Lump sum payable to petitioner, Patricia Dietrich: $55,052.77 Respectfully submitted, BRETT A. SHUMATE Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General C. SALVATORE D’ALESSIO 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, unreimbursed expenses, future lost earnings and future pain and suffering. 2 Case 1:23-vv-01871-UNJ Document 28 Filed 04/08/25 Page 5 of 5 HEATHER L. PEARLMAN Deputy Director Torts Branch, Civil Division VORIS E. JOHNSON Assistant Director Torts Branch, Civil Division /s/ ELIZABETH A. ANDARY ELIZABETH A. ANDARY 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) 616-9824 E-mail: Elizabeth.A.Andary@usdoj.gov Dated: February 21, 2025 3 ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 4: USCOURTS-cofc-1_23-vv-01871-cl-extra-11131235 Date issued/filed: 2025-09-02 Pages: 1 Docket text: Supplementary opinion from CourtListener cluster 10664648 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 23-1871V PATRICIA DIETRICH, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, v. Filed: July 31, 2025 SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Leah VaSahnja Durant, Law Offices of Leah V. Durant, PLLC, Washington, DC, for Petitioner. Elizabeth Andary, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION ON ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS1 On October 24, 2023, Patricia Dietrich 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, as the result of an influenza vaccination received on October 4, 2022. Petition at 1. On February 28, 2025, I issued a decision awarding compensation to Petitioner based on the Respondent’s proffer. ECF No. 24. 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 (2018). Petitioner has now filed a motion for attorney’s fees and costs, requesting an award of $21,127.93 (representing $20,420.30 in fees plus $707.63 in costs). Motion for Attorney’s Fees, filed on May 2, 2025. ECF No. 29. Furthermore, Petitioner filed a signed statement representing that no personal out-of-pocket expenses were incurred. Id. at 2. Respondent reacted to the motion on May 13, 2025, reporting that he is satisfied the statutory requirements for an award of attorney’s fees and costs are met in this case, but deferring resolution of the amount to be awarded to my discretion. Respondent’s Response to Motion at 2, 4, ECF No. 30. Petitioner filed a reply requesting an award of fees and costs as indicated in the Motion. ECF No. 31. I have reviewed the billing records submitted with Petitioner’s requests and find a reduction in the amount of fees to be awarded appropriate, for the reasons set forth below. ANALYSIS The Vaccine Act permits an award of reasonable attorney’s fees and costs for successful claimants. Section 15(e). Counsel must submit fee requests that include contemporaneous and specific billing records indicating the service performed, the number of hours expended on the service, and the name of the person performing the service. See Savin v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 85 Fed. Cl. 313, 316-18 (2008). Counsel should not include in their fee requests hours that are “excessive, redundant, or otherwise unnecessary.” Saxton v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 3 F.3d 1517, 1521 (Fed. Cir. 1993) (quoting Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424, 434 (1983)). It is “well within the special master’s discretion to reduce the hours to a number that, in [her] experience and judgment, [is] reasonable for the work done.” Id. at 1522. Furthermore, the special master may reduce a fee request sua sponte, apart from objections raised by respondent and without providing a petitioner notice and opportunity to respond. See Sabella v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 86 Fed. Cl. 201, 209 (2009). A special master need not engage in a line-by-line analysis of petitioner’s fee application when reducing fees. Broekelschen v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 102 Fed. Cl. 719, 729 (2011). The petitioner “bears the burden of establishing the hours expended, the rates charged, and the expenses incurred.” Wasson v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 24 Cl. Ct. 482, 484 (1991). The Petitioner “should present adequate proof [of the attorney’s fees and costs sought] at the time of the submission.” Wasson, 24 Cl. Ct. at 484 n.1. Petitioner’s counsel “should make a good faith effort to exclude from a fee request hours that are excessive, redundant, or otherwise unnecessary, just as a lawyer in private 2 practice ethically is obligated to exclude such hours from his fee submission.” Hensley, 461 U.S. at 434. ATTORNEY FEES The hourly rates requested by attorneys Leah Durant and Christopher Williams, and their supporting paralegals through the end of 2024, are reasonable and consistent with our prior determinations and will therefore be adopted. However, the rate of $550.00 for 2025 time billed by Ms. Durant require further evaluation and adjustment. Attorney Durant was previously awarded the lesser rates of $530.00 for work performed in 2025. See Jackman v. Sec’y of Health & Hum. Servs., No. 23-1749, Slip Op. 36 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. June 24, 2025). I find no reason to deviate from such reasoned determination and it otherwise is not the practice of OSM to adjust prior rate determinations upward in later cases. See Jefferson v. Sec’y of Health & Hum. Servs., No. 19-1882V, 2023 WL 387051 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Jan. 9, 2023). Accordingly, I hereby reduce Ms. Durant’s rate for work performed in 2025 to be consistent with the aforementioned decision. Application of the foregoing reduces the amount of fees to be awarded by $140.00.3 ATTORNEY’S COSTS Petitioner has otherwise provided supporting documentation for all claimed costs. ECF No. 29-2. Respondent offered no specific objection to the rates or amounts sought. I find the requested costs reasonable and hereby award them in full. CONCLUSION The Vaccine Act permits an award of reasonable attorney’s fees and costs for successful claimants. Section 15(e). Accordingly, I hereby GRANT, in part, Petitioner’s Motion for attorney’s fees and costs. I award a total of $20,987.93 (representing $20,280.30 in fees plus $707.63 in costs) to be paid through an ACH deposit to Petitioner’s counsel’s IOLTA account for prompt disbursement. In the absence of a 3 This amount consists of a reduction to Leah Durant’s 2025 hourly rate and is calculated as follows: ($550.00 - $530.00 = $20.00 x 7.00 hours billed) = $140.00 in fees to be reduced. 3 timely-filed motion for review (see Appendix B to the Rules of the Court), the Clerk of Court shall enter judgment in accordance with this Decision.4 IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Brian H. Corcoran Brian H. Corcoran Chief Special Master 4 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties may expedite entry of judgment by filing a joint notice renouncing their right to seek review. 4