In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 14-1094V

Filed: June 9, 2015

Unpublished

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

JASMINE MORGAN (Parent), *

On behalf of the Estate of *

C.S. (deceased, minor), *

*

Petitioner, * Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;

* Diphtheria, tetanus and acellular 

* Pertussis (“DtaP”); Encephalopathy;

SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Death; Table Injury

AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Special Processing Unit (“SPU”)

*

Respondent. *

*

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Rabiah Abdullah, Rich Law Firm, P.C., Washington, D.C., for petitioner.

Michael Patrick Milmoe, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

Vowell, Chief Special Master:

On November 10, 2014, Jasmine Morgan filed a petition for compensation under 

the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq.,

2 [the 

“Vaccine Act” or “Program”] on behalf of C.S., a deceased minor. Petitioner alleges that

C.S. died of acute cerebral edema and brain herniation as a result of receiving, inter 

alia, a DtaP vaccine. Petition at 1. Petitioner alleged C.S.’s injury and death were 

either caused in fact by his vaccinations or constituted an injury contained within the 

Vaccine Injury Table. Id at 6. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of 

the Office of Special Masters.

1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I intend to 

post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, in accordance with the E-Government Act 

of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-347, § 205, 116 Stat. 2899, 2913 (codified as amended at 44 U.S.C. § 3501 

note (2006)). 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 “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 

300aa (2006).

 
On June 8, 2015, respondent filed her Rule 4(c) report in which she concedes 

that petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report

at 1. Specifically, respondent states:

DICP has concluded that a preponderance of evidence establishes that 

C.S.’s injury meets the requirements of demonstrating an on-Table 

encephalopathy for pertussis-containing vaccines, pursuant to the Vaccine 

Injury Table. 42 C.F.R. § 100.3(a). In addition, DICP concluded that C.S’s 

death was a result of his on-Table injury. Finally, DICP concluded that 

C.S.’s injury and death were not due to factors unrelated to the 

administration of this vaccine. See 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-13(a)(1). In 

summary, in light of the information contained in petitioner’s medical 

records, respondent has concluded that C.S’s death is compensable 

under the Act.

 Id. at 4. 

In view of respondent’s concession and the evidence before me, I find that 

petitioner is entitled to compensation.

s/Denise K. Vowell

Denise K. Vowell

Chief Special Master