JOSHI v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 23-1233V
SANTOSH JOSHI,
Petitioner,
v.
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES,
Respondent.
Chief Special Master Corcoran
Filed: December 2, 2025
Renee J. Gentry, The Law Office of Renee J. Gentry, Washington, DC, for Petitioner.
Camille Jordan Webster, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1
On July 19, 2023, Santosh Joshi (“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”). Petitioner alleges that he suffered from a shoulder injury related to
vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) as a result of receiving a tetanus-diphtheria-acellular
pertussis (“Tdap”) vaccination on June 13, 2022. Pet., ECF No. 1. Petitioner further
alleges that he suffered the residual effects of his injury for more than six months. Id. The
case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.
On August 21, 2025, I issued a Fact Ruling finding that the onset of Petitioner’s
injury occurred within 48 hours of vaccination, as alleged. ECF No. 28.
1 Because this Ruling 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 (2018).
Case 1:23-vv-01233-UNJ Document 37 Filed 01/06/26 Page 1 of 2

On November 20, 2025, Respondent filed his Amended Rule 4(c) report in which
he states that in light of my Fact Ruling, he will not continue to defend this matter on other
grounds and requests a ruling on the record regarding Petitioner’s entitlement to
compensation. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report at 2, ECF No. 32. Specifically, Respondent
indicated that Petitioner has otherwise “met the criteria for SIRVA as defined by the
Vaccine Injury Table” and Qualifications and Aids to Interpretation for SIRVA. Id. at 7.
Based on the record as it now stands, Respondent “does not dispute that [P]etitioner has
satisfied all legal prerequisites for compensation under the Act.” Id.
In view of Respondent’s position and the evidence of record, I find that
Petitioner is entitled to compensation.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Brian H. Corcoran
Brian H. Corcoran
Chief Special Master
Case 1:23-vv-01233-UNJ Document 37 Filed 01/06/26 Page 2 of 2