In the fall of 2010, plaintiff Eugene Acevedo, 59, a retired Marine, began presenting to the San Diego Veteran’s Administration Medical Center with complaints of headaches. He was previously placed on Coumadin, a blood thinner, after being found to have clotting following an abdominal surgery to treat gastrointestinal issues in late 2009 and 2010. As a result, at his first presentation at the VAMC in the fall of 2010, he underwent a computerized tomography scan (“CT scan”), which was negative for any hemorrhage. He was seen at the VAMC for his headache on seven different occasions in 2010, and was treated during each visit before he was eventually referred to a headache specialist in neurology. After his last visit to the VAMC in December 2010, Acevedo left and went to a different hospital, where he underwent another CT scan and was determined to have a subdural hematoma, or a brain bleed. Acevedo sued the operator of the VAMC, the United States of America, and the matter proceeded to a bench trial. Acevedo alleged that the defendant failed to detect, test for and diagnose his condition and that these failures constituted medical malpractice. He claimed that the VAMC should have conducted a CT scan of his head each time he presented to the VAMC with a headache while he was on Coumadin, but that it failed to do so. Defense counsel argued that a CT scan was not warranted during each presentation to the hospital and that it was uncertain when and how the brain bleed started. Counsel also argued that the standard of care and applicable guidelines do not require a CT scan upon every presentation to the hospital., Acevedo suffered a subdural hematoma. He claimed the condition caused cognitive impairment, along with pain and suffering from headaches. One day after his condition was diagnosed in December 2010, Acevedo underwent a craniotomy to drain the blood. Acevedo claimed that he had a good outcome following the surgery. However, he claimed he still suffers residual issues with his memory and cognitive functioning. Defense counsel contended that the plaintiff’s emergency medical expert did not present evidence to tie Acevedo’s problems to an alleged delay in diagnosis.