United States Court of Federal Claims, 2025

Castillo v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Decided November 24, 2025 · Brian H. Corcoran

Opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 25-575V

RHEAMYRL JUBELAG CASTILLO, Chief Special Master Corcoran

Petitioner, Filed: October 24, 2025 v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent.

Bruce William Slane, Law Office of Bruce W. Slane, P.C., White Plains, NY, for Petitioner.

Naseem Kourosh, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

On April 2, 2025, Rheamyrl Jubelag Castillo 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 Guillain-Barré Syndrome (“GBS”) as a result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccine received on October 25, 2023. Petition at ¶¶ 3, 73. 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 of a civil action on her behalf as a result of her injury. Petition at ¶¶ 74-76. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On October 24, 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 states that “[P]etitioner has satisfied the criteria set forth in the Vaccine Injury Table and the Qualifications and Aids to Interpretation for GBS following administration of a seasonal flu vaccination. 42 C.F.R. § 100.3(a)(XIV)(D), (c)(15).” Id. at 6. Respondent further agrees that “the case was timely filed, that the flu vaccine was received in the United States, and that [P]etitioner satisfies the statutory severity requirement by suffering the residual effects or complications of her injury for more than six months after vaccine administration. See 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa- 11(c)(1)(B)(i)(Ι), -11(c)(1)(D)(i).” 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

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