{"package_id":"USCOURTS-cofc-1_90-vv-01304","decision_granule_id":"USCOURTS-cofc-1_90-vv-01304-cl6644759","petitioner_identifier":"Maria Isabel Salceda","is_minor":null,"age_at_vaccination":null,"age_unit_raw":null,"vaccine_type":"DPT","vaccination_date":null,"condition_raw":"injuries allegedly suffered by her daughter, Maria, as a result of a DPT (diphtheria, pertussis, and tetanus) vaccination administered in July of 1982 and a DT vaccination administered on October 7, 1982","condition_category":"other","autism_spectrum_adjacent":0,"outcome":"unclear","award_amount_usd":null,"decision_date":"1994-01-06","extraction_version":"gemini-v2","extracted_at":"2026-04-30T14:08:53.580399+00:00","number_of_concurrent_vaccines":null,"dose_number":null,"time_to_onset_days":null,"theory_of_causation":"Petitioner Berta Salceda filed a petition on behalf of her daughter, Maria Isabel Salceda, alleging injuries from a DPT vaccination in July 1982 and a DT vaccination on October 7, 1982. The Special Master initially dismissed the petition under Section 11(a)(5)(B) of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, citing a pending civil action against Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc. The Federal Circuit's decision in Schumacher v. Secretary, HHS, cast doubt on this dismissal, requiring reconsideration of whether the bar applies when the pending suit against the vaccine administrator concerns post-vaccination care rather than administration. The court also directed the Special Master to consider dismissal under Section 11(a)(6), which bars petitions if a civil action for damages was filed after November 15, 1988, for a vaccine administered before that date. The court noted the California action met the timing requirements and named the vaccine manufacturer, Connaught Laboratories, Inc., as a defendant. The court remanded for the Special Master to address both Section 11(a)(5)(B) and Section 11(a)(6) dismissal grounds, including petitioner's arguments regarding the capacity of Maria's legal representatives in the California action. The specific theory of causation for Maria's alleged injuries and any expert testimony are not detailed in the provided text. The case was remanded for further proceedings.","is_death":0,"date_of_death":null,"petition_filed_date":"1994-01-06","case_summary":"Berta Salceda filed a petition under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 on behalf of her daughter, Maria Isabel Salceda, seeking compensation for injuries allegedly suffered as a result of a DPT vaccination administered in July 1982 and a DT vaccination administered on October 7, 1982. The Special Master had previously dismissed the petition, finding it barred by Section 11(a)(5)(B) of the Act due to a pending civil action against Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc. This civil action involved claims related to both the vaccine administration and subsequent post-vaccination care. However, a subsequent Federal Circuit Court decision in Schumacher v. Secretary, HHS, interpreted Section 11(a)(5)(B) to apply only to pending civil actions against vaccine administrators or manufacturers for their actions in those capacities. The court noted that the pending civil action in this case involved post-vaccination care, and while Kaiser administered the vaccines, the suit focused on subsequent care. The court found that the Special Master's reliance on Matos v. Secretary, HHS, was undermined by the Schumacher decision. The court questioned whether the Section 11(a)(5)(B) bar applies when the pending suit against the administrator or manufacturer concerns actions taken in a capacity other than that of administrator or manufacturer, such as providing post-vaccination patient care. Due to the need for further analysis of this issue and the lack of input from the parties and the Special Master on this specific interpretation, the court remanded the case for the Special Master to reconsider the Section 11(a)(5)(B) issue. Additionally, the court directed the Special Master to consider the respondent's argument for dismissal under Section 11(a)(6). Section 11(a)(6) bars petitions if a civil action for damages was filed after November 15, 1988, for a vaccine administered before that date. The court observed that the California action met the timing requirements (vaccines administered in 1982, complaint filed March 23, 1990) and originally named the vaccine manufacturer, Connaught Laboratories, Inc., as a defendant. The court also noted that the \"person\" bringing the action (Maria) was the same for both the California suit and the Vaccine Act petition, regardless of the legal representatives involved. The court acknowledged petitioner's arguments regarding the proper appointment and capacity of Elias Salceda as guardian ad litem for Maria in the California action, and the subsequent appointment of Berta Salceda as guardian ad litem. The court remanded the case for further proceedings on both dismissal grounds, directing the Special Master to file a response by April 6, 1994.","is_minor_inferred":1,"is_pediatric_broad":1,"special_master":null,"petitioner_identifier_original":null,"caption_petitioner_name":null,"petitioner_attorney_name":null,"petitioner_attorney_firm":null,"petitioner_attorney_location":null,"adjudicator_name":null,"caption_people_backfilled_at":null,"attorney_canonical_keys":null,"firm_canonical_key":null,"package_title":"Salceda v. Secretary of Department of Health & Human Services","canonical_url":"https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_90-vv-01304","plain_text_url":"https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_90-vv-01304.txt","json_url":"https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_90-vv-01304.json","source_documents":[{"granule_id":"USCOURTS-cofc-1_90-vv-01304-cl6644759","title":"Salceda v. Secretary of Department of Health & Human Services","docket_text":"lead-opinion","date_issued":"1994-01-06","pdf_url":"https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/6762026/salceda-v-secretary-of-department-of-health-human-services/","pdf_bytes":null,"triage_decision":"keep","triage_reason":"recovered via CL opinion 6644759 (html_with_citations)","download_status":"ok","registry_pdf_url":"https://vicp-registry.org/pdf/USCOURTS-cofc-1_90-vv-01304/USCOURTS-cofc-1_90-vv-01304-cl6644759"}]}