VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_24-vv-00170
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_24-vv-00170
Petitioner: Frank Lopes
Filed: 2024-02-02
Decided: 2025-06-09
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 2021-03-01
Condition: shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA)
Outcome: compensated
Award amount USD: 57517

AI-assisted case summary:
Frank Lopes filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, alleging he suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) after receiving an influenza vaccine on March 1, 2021. He stated that the injury was a defined Table injury and that he received the vaccine in the United States, suffered residual effects for more than six months, and had not filed a civil action or received other compensation for the injury. The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, filed a Rule 4(c) Report conceding that Mr. Lopes was entitled to compensation, finding his alleged injury consistent with SIRVA as defined by the Vaccine Injury Table and that he satisfied all legal prerequisites for compensation. Subsequently, a ruling on entitlement was issued finding Mr. Lopes entitled to compensation. The parties then agreed to a proffer on the award of compensation. The respondent recommended an award of $57,517.62, comprising $57,500.00 for pain and suffering and $17.62 for past unreimbursable expenses. Mr. Lopes agreed with this proffered award. The Chief Special Master issued a decision awarding Mr. Lopes the lump sum of $57,517.62, representing compensation for pain and suffering and actual unreimbursable expenses.

Theory of causation field:
Table

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_24-vv-00170-0
Date issued/filed: 2024-11-26
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC ORDER/RULING (Originally filed: 10/22/2024) regarding 19 Ruling on Entitlement ( Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. )(mpj) Service on parties made.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:24-vv-00170-UNJ Document 22 Filed 11/26/24 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 24-0170V
FRANK LOPES, Chief Special Master Corcoran
Petitioner, Filed: October 22, 2024
v.
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES,
Respondent.
Nicole Anne Caplan-Mason, Law Office of Sylvia Chin-Caplan, LLC, Boston, MA, for
Petitioner.
Rachelle Bishop, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1
On February 2, 2024, Frank Lopes 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 shoulder injury related to vaccine
administration (“SIRVA”), a defined Table injury, or in the alternative a caused-in-fact or
significant aggravation injury, after receiving an influenza (“flu”) vaccine on March 1, 2021.
Petition at 1 ¶¶ 4, 23, 27. Petitioner also alleged that he received the flu vaccine within
the United States, that he suffered the residual effects of his SIRVA for more than six
months, and that neither he nor any other party has filed a civil action or received
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 1:24-vv-00170-UNJ Document 22 Filed 11/26/24 Page 2 of 2
compensation for his SIRVA, alleged as vaccine-related. Id. at ¶¶ 18, 20-21. The case
was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.
On October 21, 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 believes “that [P]etitioner’s alleged injury is consistent with
SIRVA as defined by the Vaccine Injury Table.” Id. at 4. He adds that “based upon the
record as it now stands, [P]etitioner has satisfied all legal prerequisites for compensation
under the Act.” Id.
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_24-vv-00170-1
Date issued/filed: 2025-06-09
Pages: 5
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 05/08/2025) regarding 30 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer ( Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. )(mpj) Service on parties made.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:24-vv-00170-UNJ Document 34 Filed 06/09/25 Page 1 of 5
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 24-0170V
FRANK LOPES, Chief Special Master Corcoran
Petitioner, Filed: May 8, 2025
v.
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES,
Respondent.
Nicole Anne Caplan-Mason, Law Office of Sylvia Chin-Caplan, LLC, Boston, MA, for
Petitioner.
Rachelle Bishop, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1
On February 2, 2024, Frank Lopes 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 shoulder injury related to vaccine
administration (“SIRVA”), a defined Table injury, or in the alternative a caused-in-fact or
significant aggravation injury, after receiving an influenza (“flu”) vaccine on March 1, 2021.
Petition at 1 ¶¶ 4, 23, 27. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the
Office of Special Masters.
On October 22, 2024, a ruling on entitlement was issued, finding Petitioner entitled
to compensation for her SIRVA. On May 5, 2025, Respondent filed a proffer on award of
compensation (“Proffer”) indicating Petitioner should be awarded $57,517.62,
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 1:24-vv-00170-UNJ Document 34 Filed 06/09/25 Page 2 of 5
representing $57,500.00 for pain and suffering and $17.62 for past unreimbursable
expenses.3 Proffer at 1-2. In the 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 $57,517.62, representing $57,500.00 for pain and suffering and
$17.62 for actual 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.4
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Brian H. Corcoran
Brian H. Corcoran
Chief Special Master
3 As dictated by the Vaccine Act, this amount does not include compensation “for any item or service to the
extent that payment has been made, or can reasonably be expected to be made, with respect to such item
or service . . . under an insurance policy.” Section 15(g). The Vaccine Act always and by its own terms
functions as a secondary payer to a petitioner’s health care insurance. Any entitlement award paid to a
petitioner cannot include amounts paid or expected to be paid under his or her existing health care
insurance policy. The Act also prohibits any health insurance policy from “mak[ing] payment of benefits
under the policy secondary to the payment of compensation under the Program.” Section 15(h).
Because Petitioner’s medical insurance carrier has asserted a right of subrogation on several occasions,
despite being provided with a copy of the General Order Regarding Subrogation, explaining the Vaccine
Act’s role as a secondary payer, which can be found at the Court’s website, I am including this additional
language to clarify that the compensation being awarded in this Damages Decision is for Petitioner’s out-
of-pocket expenses only, and not for any amounts that are covered by her medical insurance policy. See
https://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/guidelines-practice-under-national-vaccine-injury-compensation-program
(last visited on May 7, 2025).
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

Case 1:24-vv-00170-UNJ Document 34 Filed 06/09/25 Page 3 of 5
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
___________________________________
)
FRANK LOPES, )
)
Petitioner, ) No. 24-170V (ECF)
) Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran
v. )
)
SECRETARY OF HEALTH )
AND HUMAN SERVICES, )
)
Respondent. )
___________________________________ )
RESPONDENT’S PROFFER ON AWARD OF COMPENSATION
On February 2, 2024, Frank Lopes (“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”), alleging that he suffered a Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration
(“SIRVA”), as defined in the Vaccine Injury Table, following administration of an influenza
vaccination that he received on March 1, 2021. Petition at 1. On October 21, 2024, the
Secretary of Health and Human Services (“respondent”) filed a Rule 4(c) Report recommending
that petitioner be found entitled to compensation. ECF No. 18. On October 22, 2024, the Chief
Special Master issued a Ruling on Entitlement finding petitioner entitled to compensation. ECF
No. 19.
I. Items of Compensation
A. Pain and Suffering
Respondent proffers that petitioner should be awarded $57,500.00 in pain and suffering.
See 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a)(4). Petitioner agrees.

Case 1:24-vv-00170-UNJ Document 34 Filed 06/09/25 Page 4 of 5
B. Past Unreimbursable Expenses
Evidence supplied by petitioner documents that he incurred past unreimbursable expenses
related to his vaccine-related injury. Respondent proffers that petitioner should be awarded past
unreimbursable expenses in the amount of $17.62. 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 following: a lump sum payment of $57,517.62, to be paid
through an ACH deposit to petitioner’s counsel IOLTA account for prompt disbursement to
petitioner.1
III. Summary of Recommended Payments Following Judgment
Lump sum payable to petitioner, Frank Lopes: $57,517.62
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 1:24-vv-00170-UNJ Document 34 Filed 06/09/25 Page 5 of 5
Respectfully submitted,
YAAKOV M. ROTH
Acting Assistant Attorney General
C. SALVATORE D’ALESSIO
Director
Torts Branch, Civil Division
HEATHER L. PEARLMAN
Deputy Director
Torts Branch, Civil Division
VORIS E. JOHNSON, JR.
Assistant Director
Torts Branch, Civil Division
/s/ Rachelle P. Bishop
RACHELLE P. BISHOP
Trial Attorney
Torts Branch, Civil Division
U.S. Department of Justice
P.O. Box 146
Benjamin Franklin Station
Washington, D.C. 20044-0146
(202) 616-3662
Rachelle.P.Bishop@usdoj.gov
DATED: May 5, 2025
3