VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_20-vv-01682
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_20-vv-01682
Petitioner: Charles Edwards
Filed: 2020-11-24
Decided: 2023-04-26
Vaccine: Pneumovax 23 (pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine)
Vaccination date: 2017-11-29
Condition: shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA)
Outcome: dismissed
Award amount USD: 

AI-assisted case summary:
On November 24, 2020, Charles Edwards filed a Vaccine Program petition alleging that he suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration after receiving what the petition described as a pneumococcal conjugate vaccine on November 29, 2017. The court record later showed that the vaccine was Pneumovax 23, a pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine.

After record development and medical review, respondent reported that Edwards had received an uncovered vaccine not listed on the Vaccine Injury Table and that there was no reasonable basis to proceed. Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran issued an order to show cause on August 10, 2022, explaining that Pneumovax 23 is not covered by the Vaccine Program because the Table covers pneumococcal conjugate vaccines, not polysaccharide pneumococcal vaccines. Edwards responded that dismissal should not occur for reasons of justice, equity, and fairness, and argued about CDC guidance involving conjugate and polysaccharide pneumococcal vaccines.

Chief Special Master Corcoran dismissed the petition on April 26, 2023. The decision found that Edwards unquestionably received Pneumovax 23, that the vaccine does not appear on the Vaccine Injury Table, and that he therefore could not show he received a covered vaccine as required by the Act. The dismissal was for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted, and no compensation was awarded. Edwards was represented by William Ralph Layne Walker, Jr. of The Walker Law Firm, PLLC.

Theory of causation field:
Pneumovax 23/pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (November 29, 2017) alleged to cause SIRVA. DISMISSED. Core issue was coverage, not medical causation: petition described pneumococcal conjugate vaccine, but records showed Pneumovax 23, a polysaccharide pneumococcal vaccine not included on the Vaccine Injury Table. Respondent stated no reasonable basis to proceed; Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran dismissed April 26, 2023 for failure to state a claim because petitioner could not show receipt of a covered vaccine. No injury compensation. Attorney: William Ralph Layne Walker, Jr., The Walker Law Firm, PLLC, Beaumont, TX.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_20-vv-01682-0
Date issued/filed: 2023-06-02
Pages: 3
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 04/26/2023) regarding 42 DECISION of Special Master ( Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. )(mpj) Service on parties made.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:20-vv-01682-UNJ Document 43 Filed 06/02/23 Page 1 of 3
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 20-1682V
UNPUBLISHED
CHARLES EDWARDS, Chief Special Master Corcoran
Petitioner, Filed: April 26, 2023
v.
Special Processing Unit (SPU);
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND Pneumococcal Vaccine; Shoulder
HUMAN SERVICES, Injury Related to Vaccine
Administration (SIRVA); Vaccine Not
Respondent. Covered Under the Program;
Vaccine Act Entitlement;
William Ralph Layne Walker, Jr., The Walker Law Firm, PLLC, Beaumont, TX, for
Petitioner.
Katherine Carr Esposito, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
DECISION1
On November 24, 2020, Charles Edwards (“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”). The Petition alleges that Mr. Edwards suffered
a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) “resulting from a
Pneumococcal conjugate vaccine he received on November 29, 2017.” Petition at 1.
While the Court of Federal Claims cover sheet indicated this claim was a “453 Injury –
1 Because this unpublished decision 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 (2012).

Case 1:20-vv-01682-UNJ Document 43 Filed 06/02/23 Page 2 of 3
Pneumococcal Conjugate” case, the vaccine received by Mr. Edwards was instead
Pneumovax 23, a pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine. Exhibit 13 (ECF No. 13-7) at 1;
Ex. 15 (ECF No. 21) at 2, 4.
Following two motions for extensions (ECF Nos. 10, 18) a statement of completion
was filed on August 16, 2021 (ECF No. 23) and was activated on August 18, 2021. ECF
No. 26.
On August 9, 2022, Respondent filed a status report stating that he completed his
medical review of the claim. ECF No. 38. Respondent noted that Petitioner received an
uncovered vaccine that is not listed on the Vaccine Injury Table, and therefore there is no
reasonable basis to proceed.
On August 10, 2022, I issued an Order to Show cause informing Petitioner that the
polyvalent pneumococcal vaccination, Pneumovax 23, is not covered under the Vaccine
Program. ECF No. 39. I also provided him an opportunity to offer evidence as to why his
Petition should not be dismissed.
As I explained in my Order to Show Cause, in order to receive compensation under
the Vaccine Act, a petitioner must show that he received a vaccine set forth in the Vaccine
Injury Table (the “Table”). See Section 11(c)(1)(A); 42 C.F.R. § 100.3 (2017). “There are
two types of pneumococcal vaccines ... pneumococcal conjugate and polysaccharide
vaccine[s].” Bundy v. Sec'y or Health & Hum. Servs, No. 12-769V, 2014 WL 348852, at
*1 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Jan. 8, 2014). But only pneumococcal conjugate vaccines,
routinely administered to children, are covered by the Vaccine Program. Id.; see also
Morrison v. Sec'y of Health & Hum. Servs, No. 04-1683V, 2005 WL 2008245, at *1 (Fed.
Cl. Spec. Mstr. July 26, 2005) (describing how and when pneumococcal conjugate
vaccines were added to the Vaccine Table).
On October 11, 2022, Petitioner filed a response to the Order to Show Cause,
arguing that this case not be dismissed “for the sake of justice, equity and fairness.” ECF
No. 41. Petitioner argues that, according to the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (‘CDC’), if a pneumococcal conjugate vaccine is administered to an elderly
patient, a polysaccharide vaccine should follow….” Id. at 2. Further, it is Respondent’s
burden “to prove the ‘follow up’ dose was inappropriate and thus not covered…”
Mr. Edwards unquestionably received a pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine,
Pneumovax 23, on November 29, 2017. Ex. 15 (ECF No. 21) at 4. The Pneumococcal
23-polyvalent vaccine does not appear in the Table and is therefore not covered by the
Program.3 As such, he is unable to show that he “received a vaccine set forth in the
3 National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program: Addition of Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccines to the
Vaccine Injury Table, 66 Fed. Reg. 28166 (May 22, 2001) (“[t]hrough this notice, pneumococcal conjugate
vaccines are now included as covered vaccines under Category XIII of the Table. Because the CDC only

Case 1:20-vv-01682-UNJ Document 43 Filed 06/02/23 Page 3 of 3
Vaccine Injury Table.” Section 11(c)(1)(A). Thus, Petitioner cannot receive compensation
on a claim based on a non-covered vaccine through the Vaccine Program, and the petition
must be dismissed. See, e.g., Venable v. Sec'y of Health & Hum. Servs., No. 19-1620V,
2020 WL 1486858, at *1 (Fed. Cl. Feb. 19, 2020) (dismissing petition that involves
Pneumovax); Patterson v. Sec'y of Health & Hum. Servs., No. 20-1562V, 2022 WL
497336, at *1 (Fed. Cl. Jan. 18, 2022) (dismissing petition that involves Pneumovax);
Cielencki v. Sec'y of Health & Hum. Servs., No. 15-632V, 2015 WL 10767150, at *3 (Fed.
Cl. Spec. Mstr. Dec. 22, 2015) (dismissing petition that involves Pneumovax).
Petitioner has failed to demonstrate that he received a vaccine covered under the
Vaccine Program. This case is therefore dismissed for failure to failure to state a
claim upon which relief can be granted.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Brian H. Corcoran
Brian H. Corcoran
Chief Special Master
recommended pneumococcal conjugate vaccines to the Secretary for routine administration to children,
polysaccharide-type pneumococcal vaccines are not covered under the VICP or included on the Table.”