In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 11-145V

Filed: May 7, 2013

************************************* NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

ANTONIO HERNANDEZ, *

*

* Special Master Zane

*

* Stipulation; attorneys’ fees and costs

 Petitioner, * 

 *

v. *

 *

SECRETARY OF HEALTH *

AND HUMAN SERVICES, *

 *

 Respondent. *

*

*************************************

Isaiah Richard Kalinowski, Maglio Christopher and Toale, Sarasota, FL, for Petitioner;

Chrysovalantis Panagiotis Kefalas, United States Dep’t of Justice, Washington, DC, for 

Respondent.

UNPUBLISHED DECISION ON ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS1

On May 7, 2013, the parties in the above-captioned case filed a Stipulation of Attorneys’ 

Fees and Costs (“Stipulation”) memorializing their agreement as to the appropriate amount of 

attorneys’ fees and costs in this case. Petitioner requests a total award of $19,286.30, to which 

Respondent does not object. Petitioner’s counsel represents that Petitioner incurred no personal 

1 Because this decision contains a reasoned explanation for the Special Master’s action in this 

case, the Special Master intends to post it on the website of the United States Court of Federal 

Claims, in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-347, 113 Stat. 2899, 

2913 (Dec. 17, 2002). All decisions of the Special Master will be made available to the public 

unless they contain trade secret or commercial or financial information that is privileged and 

confidential, or medical or similar information whose disclosure would clearly be an 

unwarranted invasion of privacy. When such a decision or designated substantive order is filed, 

a party has 14 days to identify and to move to redact such information before the document’s 

disclosure. If the Special Master, upon review of a timely motion to redact, agrees that the 

identified material fits within the categories listed above, the Special Master shall redact such 

material from public access. 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-12(d)(4); Vaccine Rule 18(b).

 
litigation costs. In accordance with 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(e), the undersigned awards the amount 

to which Respondent does not object.

Petitioner, Antonio Hernandez, alleged that he suffered from Guillain-Barré Syndrome 

(“GBS”), as a consequence of his receipt of the influenza (“flu”) vaccine, which vaccine is 

contained in the Vaccine Injury Table, 42 C.F.R § 100.3(a), and which he received on or about 

October 2, 2008. Petitioner alleged that he experienced the residual effects of this injury for more 

than six months. Petitioner also represented that there have been no prior awards or settlement of 

a civil action for these damages. Petitioner also alleged that the residual effects of this injury for 

more than six months and that he has not otherwise received compensation for such injuries. A 

decision awarding compensation based upon the parties’ stipulation was entered on November 

19, 2012.

Although Respondent did not concede the claim, the parties, nonetheless, settled the 

matter, and an award of compensation was made. Because Petitioner had been awarded 

compensation, Petitioner is entitled to an award of reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs. 42 

U.S.C. § 300aa-15(e). The undersigned also finds that the stipulated amount of $19,286.30, in 

attorneys’ fees and costs, is reasonable based on the stage at which this matter was settled. 

Based on the request’s reasonableness and pursuant to Vaccine Rule 13, the undersigned 

GRANTS the parties’ request as outlined in the Stipulation. The judgment shall reflect that 

Petitioner is awarded attorneys’ fees and costs as follows:

in a check made payable jointlyto Petitioner (Antonio Hernandez) and Petitioner’s 

counsel (Isaiah Richard Kalinowski of the law firm Maglio Christopher and Toale),

the amount of $19,286.30, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(e). The check for 

attorneys’ fees and costs shall be mailed directly to the main office of Maglio

Christopher and Toale, located at 1605 Main Street, Suite 710, Sarasota, Florida 

34236.

The court thanks the parties for their cooperative efforts in resolving this matter. In the 

absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC, Appendix B, the Clerk is directed to 

enter judgment accordingly.2

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Daria Zane

Daria J. Zane

Special Master 

2 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties can expedite entry of judgment by each party filing 

a notice renouncing the right to seek review by a United States Court of Federal Claims judge.

2