VICP Registry Case Source Bundle Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_23-vv-01084 Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_23-vv-01084 Petitioner: John Luu Filed: 2023-07-17 Decided: 2025-03-28 Vaccine: Tdap Vaccination date: 2022-06-16 Condition: shoulder injury after Tdap vaccination Outcome: dismissed Award amount USD: AI-assisted case summary: John Luu filed his petition on July 17, 2023, alleging that a tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccine administered on June 16, 2022 caused a shoulder injury. He was represented by Jonathan J. Svitak of Shannon Law Group, P.C. The public decision explains that Luu did not file supporting documentation with the petition. After an initial order required additional statutorily required documents, he still did not file supporting medical records. On March 25, 2025, he moved for a decision dismissing the petition, stating that an investigation of the facts and science supporting the case had shown he would be unable to prove entitlement to compensation in the Vaccine Program. Because the case ended on insufficient proof, the public decision does not describe Luu's first shoulder symptom, onset interval, examination findings, imaging, injections, physical therapy, work impact, or day-to-day impairment. It also does not identify experts or evaluate a biological causation theory. The available story is procedural: Luu alleged an on-Table shoulder injury from the June 2022 Tdap vaccination but did not submit medical records to support the claim. Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran granted Luu's motion and dismissed the case for insufficient proof on March 28, 2025. No injury compensation was awarded. Theory of causation field: Tdap vaccine on June 16, 2022 allegedly causing shoulder injury / Table shoulder claim. DISMISSED for insufficient proof. Petitioner filed no supporting documentation or medical records and moved to dismiss after investigation showed he could not prove entitlement. Public decision provides no onset, clinical timeline, treatment, imaging, experts, or mechanism. Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran, decision March 28, 2025. No injury compensation awarded. Petition filed July 17, 2023. Attorney: Jonathan J. Svitak. Public staged source text: ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_23-vv-01084-0 Date issued/filed: 2025-04-22 Pages: 2 Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 3/28/2025) regarding 15 DECISION of Special Master. Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. (abs) Service on parties made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:23-vv-01084-UNJ Document 16 Filed 04/22/25 Page 1 of 2 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 23-1084V UNPUBLISHED JOHN LUU, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, v. Filed: March 28, 2025 SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Jonathan J. Svitak, Shannon Law Group, P.C., Woodridge, IL, for Petitioner. Heather L. Pearlman, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION1 On July 17, 2023, John Luu filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. § 300aa—10 through 34,2 (the “Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleged that he suffered a shoulder injury from a tetanus- diphtheria-acellular pertussis (“Tdap”) vaccine he received on June 16, 2022. ECF No. 1. On March 25, 2025, Petitioner filed a motion for a decision dismissing the petition. ECF No. 14. For the reasons set forth below, Petitioner’s motion is GRANTED, and this case is DISMISSED. Relevant Procedural History Petitioner did not file any supporting documentation with the petition. The PAR Initial Order required Petitioner to file additional statutorily required documents. ECF No. 5. Petitioner did not subsequently file any supporting documentation. On March 25, 2025, Petitioner filed a motion for a decision dismissing the petition stating that “[a]n investigation of the facts and science supporting his case has 1 Because this 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 Decision 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 “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa (2012). Case 1:23-vv-01084-UNJ Document 16 Filed 04/22/25 Page 2 of 2 demonstrated to petitioner that he will be unable to prove that he is entitled to compensation in the Vaccine Program.” ECF No. 14 at 1. Petitioner understands that dismissal of his petition would result in a judgment against him and end all his rights in the Vaccine Program. Id. at 2. Grounds for Dismissal To receive compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, a petitioner must prove either 1) that the vaccinee suffered an “on-Table” injury – i.e., an injury falling within the Vaccine Injury Table – corresponding to one of the listed vaccines within the applicable time frames, or 2) that the vaccinee suffered an injury not listed the Table or outside the applicable time frames, an “off-Table” injury, that was actually caused by a listed vaccine. See §§ 300aa—13(a)(1)(A) and 11(c)(1). Here, Petitioner alleged an on-Table claim, i.e., that his shoulder injury was caused by the Tdap vaccination. Petitioner has not filed any medical records in support of his vaccine injury. Moreover, in the motion for decision, Petitioner stated that he would not be able to prove entitlement to compensation in the Vaccine Program. Thus, Petitioner has failed to establish entitlement to compensation in the Vaccine Program. This case is dismissed for insufficient proof. The clerk shall enter judgment accordingly.3 IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Brian H. Corcoran Brian H. Corcoran Chief Special Master 3 If Petitioner wishes to bring a civil action, he must file a notice of election rejecting the judgment pursuant to § 21(a) “not later than 90 days after the date of the court’s final judgment.” 2 ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 2: USCOURTS-cofc-1_23-vv-01084-cl-extra-10848926 Date issued/filed: 2025-04-22 Pages: 1 Docket text: Supplementary opinion from CourtListener cluster 10382338 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 23-1084V UNPUBLISHED JOHN LUU, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, v. Filed: March 28, 2025 SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Jonathan J. Svitak, Shannon Law Group, P.C., Woodridge, IL, for Petitioner. Heather L. Pearlman, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION1 On July 17, 2023, John Luu filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. § 300aa—10 through 34,2 (the “Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleged that he suffered a shoulder injury from a tetanus- diphtheria-acellular pertussis (“Tdap”) vaccine he received on June 16, 2022. ECF No. 1. On March 25, 2025, Petitioner filed a motion for a decision dismissing the petition. ECF No. 14. For the reasons set forth below, Petitioner’s motion is GRANTED, and this case is DISMISSED. Relevant Procedural History Petitioner did not file any supporting documentation with the petition. The PAR Initial Order required Petitioner to file additional statutorily required documents. ECF No. 5. Petitioner did not subsequently file any supporting documentation. On March 25, 2025, Petitioner filed a motion for a decision dismissing the petition stating that “[a]n investigation of the facts and science supporting his case has 1 Because this 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 Decision 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 “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa (2012). demonstrated to petitioner that he will be unable to prove that he is entitled to compensation in the Vaccine Program.” ECF No. 14 at 1. Petitioner understands that dismissal of his petition would result in a judgment against him and end all his rights in the Vaccine Program. Id. at 2. Grounds for Dismissal To receive compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, a petitioner must prove either 1) that the vaccinee suffered an “on-Table” injury – i.e., an injury falling within the Vaccine Injury Table – corresponding to one of the listed vaccines within the applicable time frames, or 2) that the vaccinee suffered an injury not listed the Table or outside the applicable time frames, an “off-Table” injury, that was actually caused by a listed vaccine. See §§ 300aa—13(a)(1)(A) and 11(c)(1). Here, Petitioner alleged an on-Table claim, i.e., that his shoulder injury was caused by the Tdap vaccination. Petitioner has not filed any medical records in support of his vaccine injury. Moreover, in the motion for decision, Petitioner stated that he would not be able to prove entitlement to compensation in the Vaccine Program. Thus, Petitioner has failed to establish entitlement to compensation in the Vaccine Program. This case is dismissed for insufficient proof. The clerk shall enter judgment accordingly.3 IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Brian H. Corcoran Brian H. Corcoran Chief Special Master 3 If Petitioner wishes to bring a civil action, he must file a notice of election rejecting the judgment pursuant to § 21(a) “not later than 90 days after the date of the court’s final judgment.” 2