# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 16-0617V Filed: September 20, 2017

UNPUBLISHED

ABIGAIL MICHEL,

Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent. Special Processing Unit (SPU); Attorneys’ Fees and Costs

Paul R. Brazil, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA, for petitioner. Debra A. Filteau Begley, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

DECISION ON ATTORNE YS’ FEES AND COSTS 1

Dorsey, Chief Special Master:

On May 25, 2016, petitioner filed a petit ion for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq., 2 (the “Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleged that she suffered left shoulder injuries including cellulitis and an abscess as a result of a tetanus-diphther ia-pertussis (“Tdap”) vaccination she received on April 3, 2015. On June 30, 2017, the undersigned issued a decision awarding compensation to petitioner based on the parties’ joint stipulat ion. (ECF No. 30.)

On August 9, 2017, petitioner filed a motion for attorneys’ fees and costs. (ECF No. 34.) Petitioner requests attorne ys’ fees in the amount of $17,173.00, and attorneys’ costs in t he amount of $768.85. ( Id. at 1-2.) In accordance with General

1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the undersigned intends to post it on the United States Cour t of Federal Claims'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 inform ation, the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, t he 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 Ac t will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa (2012).2 Order #9, petitioner's counsel represents that petitioner incurred no out-of-pocket expenses. Thus, the total amount requested is $17,941.85.

On August 23, 2017, respondent filed a response stating respondent has no objection to petitioner’s motion. (ECF No. 35.) Respondent cautions, however, that his lack of objection “should not be c onstrued as admission, concessi on, or waiver as to the hourly rates requested, the number of hours billed, or the other litigat ion related costs.”

Id.

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 request ed hours or rates, ex cept as follows.

Petitioner billed a total of 1.3 hours for attorn ey C. Clark Hodgson, II, at an hourly rate of $225.00, for a total of $292.50. As has been previously stated, due in part to Mr. Hodgson’s lack of experience in the Vacci ne Program, the undersigned finds that the appropriately hourly rate for Mr. Hodgson is $200. Thus, petitioner is awarded a total of $260.00 for Mr. Hodgson’s time which results in a reduction of $32.50.

The Vaccine Act permits an award of reasonable attorneys’ fees and cost s. § 15(e). Based on the reasonableness of petitioner’s request, the undersigned

GRANTS petitioner’s motion for atto rneys’ fees and costs.

Accordingly, the undersigned awards the total of $17,909.35, 3 as a lump sum in the form of a check jointly payable to petitioner and petitioner’s counsel Muller Brazil, LLP.

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

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Nora Beth Dorsey Nora Beth Dorsey Chief Special Master

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 co sts” as well as fees for legal services rendered. Furthermore, § 15(e)(3) prevents an attorney from char ging 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 c an be expedited by the parties’ joint filing of notice renouncing the right to seek review.