Ling v. Hhs

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
• Decided: February 18, 2026
• Docket: 26-1226
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

Case: 26-1226 Document: 11 Page: 1 Filed: 02/18/2026

NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________

BRUCE A. LING, JR., Petitioner-Appellant

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent-Appellee ______________________

2026-1226 ______________________

Appeal from the United States Court of Federal Claims in No. 1:24-vv-01899-UNJ. ______________________

ON MOTION ______________________

Before TARANTO, MAYER, and STARK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM. ORDER Bruce A. Ling, Jr. moves for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. The Secretary of Health and Human Services moves to dismiss his appeal. Mr. Ling opposes dismissal. On August 12, 2025, the special master dismissed Mr. Ling’s petition for compensation under the National Case: 26-1226 Document: 11 Page: 2 Filed: 02/18/2026

Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (“Vaccine Act”) as time barred. On September 15, 2025, he moved for recon- sideration of that decision, which was denied on September 22, 2025. On September 22, 2025, having received no mo- tion for review from Mr. Ling, the United States Court of Federal Claims entered judgment pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-12(e)(3). Mr. Ling then filed this appeal. The statutory scheme governing Vaccine Act cases “makes appeal to the Court of Federal Claims a prerequi- site for appeal to this court.” Grimes v. Sec’y of Dep’t of Health & Hum. Servs., 988 F.2d 1196, 1198 (Fed. Cir. 1993); see 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-12(e), (f); Mahaffey v. Sec’y of Health & Hum. Servs., 368 F.3d 1378, 1382 (Fed. Cir. 2004). Because Mr. Ling did not first seek review at the Court of Federal Claims, we agree with the government that his appeal cannot proceed before this court. We will transmit his filings to the Court of Federal Claims for that court to consider whether Mr. Ling’s notice of appeal (or, alternatively, his previous motion for recon- sideration) can be construed as a motion for review under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-12(e)(1). Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT: (1) The motion is granted to the extent that the appeal is dismissed. (2) The Clerk of Court is directed to transmit a copy of this order and ECF Nos. 1, 6, and 8 to the United States Court of Federal Claims for further proceedings consistent with this order. Case: 26-1226 Document: 11 Page: 3 Filed: 02/18/2026

LING v. HHS 3

(3) Each side shall bear its own costs. FOR THE COURT

February 18, 2026 Date