In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 16-0453V 

Filed: March 7, 2018

UNPUBLISHED

ARLENE SANDMAN, 

 Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES,

 Respondent.

Special Processing Unit (SPU); 

Attorneys’ Fees and Costs

Ronald Craig Homer, Conway, Homer, P.C., Boston, MA, for petitioner.

Ann Donohue Martin, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

DECISION ON ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS1

Dorsey, Chief Special Master:

 

On April 11, 2016, Arlene Sandman (“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 she suffered from a shoulder injury 

related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) as a result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccine she 

received on October 10, 2014. Petition at 1. On September 29, 2017, the undersigned 

issued a decision awarding compensation to petitioner based on the parties’ stipulation. 

(ECF No. 39). 

On February 13, 2018, petitioner filed a motion for attorneys’ fees and costs. 

(ECF No. 44). Petitioner requests attorneys’ fees in the amount of $19,703.55 and 

attorneys’ costs in the amount of $703.60. (Id. at 1-2.) Additionally, in compliance with 

 

1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the 

undersigned intends to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, in accordance with 

the E-Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of 

Electronic Government Services). 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, the undersigned agrees that the identified material fits 

within this definition, the undersigned 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 “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 

300aa (2012).
2 

General Order #9, petitioner filed a signed statement indicating that petitioner incurred 

$400.00 in out-of-pocket expenses. (Id. at 2). Thus, the total amount requested is 

$20,807.15. 

 

On February 27, 2018, respondent filed a response to petitioner’s motion. (ECF 

No. 46). Respondent argues that “[n]either the Vaccine Act nor Vaccine Rule 13 

contemplates any role for respondent in the resolution of a request by a petitioner for an 

award of attorneys’ fees and costs.” (Id. at 1). Respondent adds, however, that he “is 

satisfied the statutory requirements for an award of attorneys’ fees and costs are met in 

this case.” (Id. at 2). Respondent “respectfully recommends that the Chief Special 

Master exercise her discretion and determine a reasonable award for attorneys’ fees 

and costs.” (Id. at 3). 

Petitioner has filed no reply. 

The undersigned has reviewed the billing records submitted with petitioner’s 

request. In the undersigned’s experience, the request appears reasonable, and the 

undersigned finds no cause to reduce the requested hours or rates. 

The Vaccine Act permits an award of reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs. 

§ 15(e). Based on the reasonableness of petitioner’s request, the undersigned 

GRANTS petitioner’s motion for attorneys’ fees and costs. 

Accordingly, the undersigned awards the total of $20,807.153 as follows:

• A lump sum of $20,407.15, representing reimbursement for 

attorneys’ fees and costs, in the form of a check payable jointly to 

petitioner and petitioner’s counsel, Ronald Craig Homer; and

• A lump sum of $400.00, representing reimbursement for petitioner’s 

costs, in the form of a check payable to petitioner.

 The clerk of the court shall enter judgment in accordance herewith.4

 

3 This amount is intended to cover all legal expenses incurred in this matter. This award encompasses all 

charges by the attorney against a client, “advanced costs” as well as fees for legal services rendered. 

Furthermore, § 15(e)(3) prevents an attorney from charging or collecting fees (including costs) that would 

be in addition to the amount awarded herein. See generally Beck v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs.,

924 F.2d 1029 (Fed. Cir.1991).

4 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment can be expedited by the parties’ joint filing of notice 

renouncing the right to seek review.
3 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Nora Beth Dorsey

 Nora Beth Dorsey

 Chief Special Master