United States Court of Federal Claims, 2025

BROOKS v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

United States Court of Federal Claims · Decided September 12, 2025 · Brian H. Corcoran

Opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 24-2147V

CHRISTOPHER BROOKS and Chief Special Master Corcoran MARTINA BROOKS, Parents of E.B., a

Minor, Filed: August 8, 2025 Petitioners, v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent.

Ronald Craig Homer, Conway, Homer, P.C., Boston, MA, for Petitioners.

Crystal Fialkowski, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

On December 30, 2024, Christopher Brooks and Martina Brooks, parents of E.B., filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq.2 (the “Vaccine Act”). Petitioners allege that E.B. suffered vasovagal syncope, resulting in traumatic dental injury, resulting from the administration of influenza (“flu”) and human papillomavirus (“HPV”) vaccines received on October 3, 2022. Petition at 1. Petitioners further allege that the vaccines were administered in the United States, E.B. suffered the residual effects of her injury for more than six months, and no lawsuits have been filed or settlements or awards accepted by anyone, including Petitioners, due to E.B.’s vaccine-related injury. Petition at 10-11. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On August 7, 2025, Respondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he concedes that Petitioners are entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report at 1. Specifically, Respondent agrees that Petitioners have satisfied the criteria set forth in the Table and Qualifications and Aids to interpretation, which afford Petitioners a presumption of causation if the onset of vasovagal syncope occurs within one hour after a seasonal flu or HPV vaccination and there is no apparent alternative cause. Id. at 4. Respondent further agrees that E.B. experienced more than six months of residual effects, and Petitioners have satisfied all legal prerequisites for compensation under the Vaccine Act. Id.

In view of Respondent’s position and the evidence of record, I find that Petitioners are entitled to compensation.

IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Brian H. Corcoran Brian H. Corcoran Chief Special Master

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), Petitioners have 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-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.