In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 14-1057V

Filed: May 18, 2015

Unpublished

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

H.S., by his parents and natural *

Guardians GREGORY and SANDRA *

SIMPSON, *

*

Petitioner, * Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;

* Diptheria Tetanus and acellular

* Pertussis (“DTaP”); Meningococcal;

SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Syncope; Special Processing Unit 

AND HUMAN SERVICES, * (“SPU”)

*

Respondent. *

*

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

Renee Gentry, Shoemaker, Gentry & Knickelbein, Vienna, VA, for petitioner.

Alexis Babcock, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

Vowell, Chief Special Master:

On October 29, 2014, Gregory and Sandra Simpson filed a petition for 

compensation on behalf of their minor son, H.S., under the National Vaccine Injury 

Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq.,

2 [the “Vaccine Act” or 

“Program”]. Petitioners allege that As a result of receiving DTaP and meningococcal 

vaccines on July 25, 212, H.S. experienced syncope, fell to the floor and fractured his 

skull. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office 

of Special Masters.

On May 18, 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

1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I intend to 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

 
at 1. Specifically, respondent “agrees that the record reflects that H.S. suffered a 

syncopal episode following his July 25, 2012 vaccinations, that his episode occurred 

within a temporally appropriate timeframe following his vaccinations, and that he 

suffered six months of residual injuries.”3 Id. at 4. Respondent further notes “the lack of 

any evidence of a factor unrelated that would otherwise explain H.S.’s syncope.” Id.

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

3 Respondent also noted that she initially disputed that H.S. experienced at least six months of residual effects prior 

to my order of March 13, 2015, in which I made a factual determination that the injury did persist for at least six 

months. Respondent’s Report at 3-4.