VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_16-vv-00475
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_16-vv-00475
Petitioner: Allen O. Cabansag
Filed: 2016-08-23
Decided: 2016-11-01
Vaccine: DTaP
Vaccination date: 2014-02-28
Condition: right shoulder injury
Outcome: compensated
Award amount USD: 135000

AI-assisted case summary:
Allen O. Cabansag filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program on April 14, 2016, alleging he suffered a right shoulder injury after receiving the diphtheria, tetanus, and acellular pertussis (DTaP) vaccine on February 28, 2014. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit. The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, filed a Rule 4(c) report on August 8, 2016, conceding that Mr. Cabansag's alleged injury was consistent with a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) and was caused by the Tdap vaccination. The respondent also agreed that Mr. Cabansag had satisfied all legal prerequisites for compensation. Based on the respondent's concession and the evidence, Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey issued a ruling on entitlement on August 23, 2016, finding Mr. Cabansag entitled to compensation. Subsequently, on November 1, 2016, Chief Special Master Dorsey issued a decision awarding Mr. Cabansag $135,000.00 as a lump sum payment. This award represents compensation for all damages available under the Act. Petitioner was represented by Carol L. Gallagher of Carol L. Gallagher, Esquire, LLC, and respondent was represented by Robert P. Coleman, III, of the U.S. Department of Justice. The public decision does not describe the specific onset of symptoms, medical tests, treatments, or expert witnesses.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioner Allen O. Cabansag alleged a right shoulder injury following administration of the DTaP vaccine on February 28, 2014. The respondent conceded that the injury was consistent with a Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA) and was caused-in-fact by the Tdap vaccination. The case was decided based on this concession, without detailed discussion of medical experts or specific causation mechanisms in the public text. Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey ruled on entitlement on August 23, 2016, and awarded $135,000.00 in a decision dated November 1, 2016. Petitioner was represented by Carol L. Gallagher, and respondent by Robert P. Coleman, III.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_16-vv-00475-0
Date issued/filed: 2016-11-01
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC ORDER/RULING (Originally filed: 08/23/2016) regarding 19 Ruling on Entitlement (Signed by Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey.)(mpj) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:16-vv-00475-UNJ Document 27 Filed 11/01/16 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 16-475V
Filed: August 23, 2016
Unpublished
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
ALLEN O. CABANSAG, *
*
v. *
Petitioner, * Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;
* Diphtheria, Tetanus, acellular Pertussis
* (“DTaP”) Vaccine; Shoulder Injury
SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Related to Vaccine Administration
AND HUMAN SERVICES, * (“SIRVA”); Special Processing Unit
* (“SPU”)
Respondent. *
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Carol L. Gallagher, Carol L. Gallagher, Esquire, LLC, Linwood, NJ, for petitioner.
Robert P. Coleman, III, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1
Dorsey, Chief Special Master:
On April 14, 2016, Allen O. Cabansag (“petitioner”) 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”). Petitioner alleges that he
suffered a right shoulder injury following the administration of the diphtheria, tetanus,
and acellular pertussis (“DTaP”) vaccine on February 28, 2014. Petition at 1. Petitioner
further alleges that he has not brought a civil action or received a settlement for his
injuries alleged as vaccine caused. Id. at ¶¶ 35-36. 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, the
undersigned intends 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 (2012)). 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, the undersigned agrees that the identified material fits
within this definition, the undersigned 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 (2012).

Case 1:16-vv-00475-UNJ Document 27 Filed 11/01/16 Page 2 of 2
On August 8, 2016, 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) Report3
at 1. Specifically, respondent “opines that petitioner’s alleged injury is consistent with a
shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) . . . [and] was caused-in-fact
by the Tdap vaccination administered in his right arm on February 28, 2014.” Id. at 4.
Respondent further agrees that “based on the current record, petitioner has satisfied all
legal prerequisites for compensation under the Act.” Id.
In view of respondent’s concession and the evidence before me, I find that
petitioner is entitled to compensation.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Nora Beth Dorsey
Nora Beth Dorsey
Chief Special Master
3 Respondent filed the Rule 4(c) Report in conjunction with a Proffer, titling the document
“RESPONDENT’S RULE 4(c) REPORT AND PROFFER ON AWARD OF COMPENSATION.”
2

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 2: USCOURTS-cofc-1_16-vv-00475-1
Date issued/filed: 2016-11-01
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 08/23/2016) regarding 20 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer (Signed by Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey.)(mpj) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:16-vv-00475-UNJ Document 28 Filed 11/01/16 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 16-475V
Filed: August 23, 2016
UNPUBLISHED
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
ALLEN O. CABANSAG, *
*
v. *
Petitioner, * Damages Based on Proffer;
* Diphtheria, Tetanus, acellular Pertussis
* (“DTaP”) Vaccine; Shoulder Injury
SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Related to Vaccine Administration
AND HUMAN SERVICES, * (“SIRVA”); Special Processing Unit
* (“SPU”)
Respondent. *
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Carol L. Gallagher, Carol L. Gallagher, Esquire, LLC, Linwood, NJ, for petitioner.
Robert P. Coleman, III, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1
Dorsey, Chief Special Master:
On April 14, 2016, Allen O. Cabansag (“petitioner”) 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”). Petitioner alleges that he
suffered a right shoulder injury following the administration of the diphtheria, tetanus,
and acellular pertussis (“DTaP”) vaccine on February 28, 2014. Petition at 1. Petitioner
further alleges that he has not brought a civil action or received a settlement for his
injuries alleged as vaccine caused. Id. at ¶¶ 35-36. The case was assigned to the
Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.
1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the
undersigned intends to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, in accordance with
the E-Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of
Electronic Government Services). 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, the undersigned agrees that the identified material fits
within this definition, the undersigned 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 (2012).

Case 1:16-vv-00475-UNJ Document 28 Filed 11/01/16 Page 2 of 2
On August 23, 2016, the undersigned issued a ruling on entitlement, finding
petitioner entitled to compensation. In her August 8, 2016 Rule 4(c) Report, respondent
included a proffer on award of compensation, stating that petitioner should be awarded
$135,000.00. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report and Proffer at 5. Respondent
represented that petitioner agrees with the proffered award. Id. Based on the record as
a whole, the undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to an award as stated in the
Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report and Proffer.
Pursuant to the terms stated in the Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report and Proffer,3
the undersigned awards petitioner a lump sum payment of $135,000.00 in the
form of a check payable to petitioner, Allen O. Cabansag. This amount represents
compensation for all damages that would be available under § 300aa-15(a).
The clerk of the court is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this
decision.4
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Nora Beth Dorsey
Nora Beth Dorsey
Chief Special Master
3 Because Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report and Proffer contains detailed medical information, it will not be
attached to this decision.
4 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment can be expedited by the parties’ joint filing of notice
renouncing the right to seek review.
2