United States Court of Federal Claims, 2026

Batista v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Decided April 7, 2026 · Herbrina D S Young

Opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS Filed: March 10, 2026

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * LUIS VEGA BATISTA, *

* Petitioner, * No. 23-1890V *

v. * Special Master Young

SECRETARY OF HEALTH * AND HUMAN SERVICES, *

Respondent. *

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Jeffrey S. Pop, Jeffrey S. Pop & Associates, Beverly Hills, CA, for Petitioner. Michael Bliley, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1

On October 26, 2023, Luis Vega Batista (“Petitioner”) filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (“the Program”). 2 Pet., ECF No. 1. Petitioner alleged that he suffered from idiopathic thrombocytopenia purpura (“ITP”) as a result of the measles, mumps, and rubella (“MMR”) vaccine he received on October 30, 2020. Id.

On March 6, 2026, Respondent filed a report pursuant to Vaccine Rule 4(c) stating that Petitioner’s claim was appropriate for compensation. Resp’t’s Rep. at 1, ECF No. 32. Specifically, Respondent agrees with Petitioner’s claim that he suffered the Table injury ITP following an MMR vaccine. Id. at 9. Specifically, Respondent states that the evidence in this case demonstrates that “Petitioner’s ITP began within the Table timeframe of 7-42 days, he demonstrated the presence of clinical manifestations of ITP, his serum platelet count was less than 50,000, and there is no evidence of a factor of an exclusionary condition or factor unrelated.” Id. (citing 42 C.F.R. § 100.3(c)(8)).

A special master may determine whether petitioners are entitled to compensation based upon the record. A hearing is not required. §300aa-13; Vaccine Rule 8(d). In light of Respondent’s concession and a review of the record, I find that Petitioners are entitled to compensation. This matter shall now proceed to the damages phase.

IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Herbrina D. S. Young Herbrina D. S. Young 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 (“the Vaccine Act” or “Act”). Hereinafter, for ease of citation, all “§” 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.