In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 17-1606V 

(not to be published)

ROBIN HAMLIN,

 Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES,

 Respondent.

Chief Special Master Corcoran

Filed: November 15, 2019

Special Processing Unit (SPU); 

Attorney’s Fees and Costs

Alison H. Haskins, Maglio Christopher & Toale, PA, Sarasota, FL, for Petitioner.

Mollie Danielle Gorney, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

DECISION ON ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS1

On October 25, 2017, Robin Hamlin, (“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 a Shoulder Injury Related to 

Vaccine Administration (“SIRVA”) as a result of her November 9, 2016 influneza (“flu”) 

vaccination. (See Petition at 1-4). On September 19, 2019, a decision was issued by 

then-Chief Special Master Dorsey, awarding compensation to Petitioner based on the 

Respondent’s proffer. (ECF No. 44). 

 

1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required 

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). This means the ruling will be available to anyone with access to the internet. 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, I 

agree that the identified material fits within this definition, I 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

Petitioner has now filed a motion for attorney’s fees and costs, dated October 4, 

2019, (ECF No. 52), requesting a total award of $22,615.91 (representing $22,050.30 in 

fees and $565.61 in costs). In accordance with General Order #9, Petitioner’s counsel 

filed a signed statement that Petitioner incurred no out-of-pocket expenses. (ECF No. 48-

3). Respondent reacted to the motion on October 4, 2019 indicating that he is satisfied 

that the statutory requirements for an award of attorney’s fees and costs are met in this 

case and defers to the Court’s discretion to determine the amount to be awarded. (ECF 

No. 49). On October 7, 2019, Petitioner filed a reply. (ECF No. 50). Petitioner disputes 

respondent’s position that he has no role in resolving attorneys’ fees and costs and further 

reiterates his view that his attorneys’ fees and costs in this case are reasonable. 

I have reviewed the billing records submitted with Petitioner’s request. In my 

experience, the request appears reasonable, and I find no cause to reduce the requested 

hours or rates. 

The Vaccine Act permits an award of reasonable attorney’s fees and costs. § 

15(e). Accordingly, I hereby GRANT Petitioner’s motion for attorney’s fees and costs. I 

award a total of $22,615.91 (representing $22,050.30 in fees and $565.61 in costs) as a 

lump sum in the form of a check jointly payable to Petitioner and Petitioner’s counsel. 

Petitioner requests the check be forwarded to Maglio Christopher & Toale, PA, 1605 Main 

Street, Suite 710, Sarasota, Florida, 34236.

In the absence of a timely-filed motion for review (see Appendix B to the Rules of 

the Court), the Clerk shall enter judgment in accordance with this decision.3

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Brian H. Corcoran

Brian H. Corcoran

Chief Special Master

 

3 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties may expedite entry of judgment by filing a joint notice 

renouncing their right to seek review.