AKERS v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 25-0442V
ANNIE AKERS,
Petitioner,
v.
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES,
Respondent.
Chief Special Master Corcoran
Filed: October 10, 2025
John Beaulieu, Siri & Glimstad, LLP, New York, NY, for Petitioner.
Ryan Pohlman Miller, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1
On March 7, 2025, Annie Akers 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 alleged that she suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine
administration (“SIRVA”), a defined Table injury, after receiving influenza (“flu”) and
tetanus, diphtheria, acellular pertussis (“Tdap”) vaccines on January 11, 2024. Petition at
1, ¶¶ 3, 14. Petitioner also alleged that she received the vaccines within the United States,
that she suffered the residual effects of her SIRVA for more than six months, and that
neither she nor any other party has filed a civil action or received compensation for her
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 1:25-vv-00442-UNJ Document 24 Filed 11/12/25 Page 1 of 2

2
SIRVA, alleged as vaccine caused. Id. at ¶¶ 3, 14-16. The case was assigned to the
Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.
On October 10, 2025, 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 [P]etitioner’s alleged injury is consistent
with SIRVA as defined by the Vaccine Injury Table.” Id. at 7. Respondent further agrees
that based on 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
Case 1:25-vv-00442-UNJ Document 24 Filed 11/12/25 Page 2 of 2