The members of the panel are unanimously of the opinion that the decisional process would not be significantly aided by oral argument in this case and the case is therefore submitted without oral argument.

Mark Fernandez, by his guardian ad litem, appeals from a judgment dismissing his action against the United States under the Federal Tort Claims Act. We affirm.

I. Facts.

We take the facts from the trial judge’s Findings of Fact, which are not clearly erroneous.

Mark and his twin brother Wayne were born approximately six weeks prematurely at Tripler Army Medical Center in Hawaii on March 14,1958. Mark weighed 2 pounds 4/2 ounces; Wayne weighed 4 pounds 9 ounces. The court found:

Mark left Tripler Hospital on May 24, 1958, and his final visit to that hospital was on June 30, 1958. On that day, a copy of his discharge summary was given to his mother, and she later delivered it to Mark’s doctors at Kaiser Foundation Hospital in Honolulu. That summary stated all of the foregoing facts of Mark’s treatment. Thus those facts were available to Mark’s parents and to his doctors at Kaiser no later than 1958.

Wayne also developed jaundice shortly after birth. However, Wayne developed normally. Mark did not. He developed deafness, a reduced I.Q., and spasticity in his lower legs. These facts developed within 2V2 years, and, of course, were known to his parents.

In October 1964, Mark’s mother, in filling out an application for Mark’s admission to a school, stated that Mark was not born deaf, but that his deafness was caused by “yellow jaundice at three days old,” and first appeared when he was 2Vi: years old.

This action was begun by the filing of an administrative claim on November 22, 1976. The Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2401 (b), requires that the administrative claim be filed “within two years after such claim accrues.” See also 28 U.S.C. § 2675 (a). The failure to file within the time specified is a jurisdictional defect in plaintiff’s case. Caton v. United States, 9 Cir., 1974, 495 F.2d 635, 637 .

Mark’s claim of malpractice is that his yellow jaundice was discovered too late, the bilirubin test was administered too late, and the transfusion was administered too late. The court concluded that Mark’s parents knew of the nexus between his deficiencies and his jaundice at least as early as 1964. We agree.

The key case here is United States v. Kubrick, 1979, 444 U.S. Ill, 100 S.Ct. 352 , 62 L.Ed.2d 259 . The essence of the decision in that case, by which we are bound is this: When the plaintiff (or, here, Mark’s parents) “became aware of his injury and its probable cause,” United States v. Kubrick, 1979, 444 U.S. Ill, 100 S.Ct. 352 , 62 L.Ed.2d 259 , the two year period started to run, that is, the claim accrued.

In Kubrick , the plaintiff was “aware of his injury and its probable cause” ( 444 U.S. at 118 , 100 S.Ct. at 357 ) more than two years before a claim was filed. Here, Mark (through his parents) was aware of his injury and its probable cause. They not only knew of the injury, and that it was caused by the jaundice, they also knew, or would have known if they had read the discharge summary, or asked the Kaiser doctors about it, that the jaundice (the “cause”) had been treated, and exactly when and how it had been treated. If they had inquired, and if there were merit in the case, presumably they would have learned that there was a possibility that the diagnosis and treatment came too late, and that earlier diagnosis and treatment would (or might) have prevented the sad after-effects of the jaundice. It is this possibility which is the sole ground upon which Mark claims that there was malpractice.

Here, Mark’s parents knew, or had available the means of knowing, all there was to know about the cause of his injuries, and who (the nurses and the doctors who diagnosed and treated his jaundice) were responsible. As in Kubrick :

No such advice was ever sought for twelve years. See also Davis v. United States, 9 Cir., 1981, 642 F.2d 328, 330-331 . Here, as in Kubrick and Davis , we decline to defer accrual of the claim until fault, as distinguished from injury and cause, is determined.

Affirmed.