# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 14-901V Filed: April 1, 2015 Unpublished

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * DIANA DARKEN, *

* Petitioner, *

v. * * Attorney Fees and Costs; Stipulation; SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND * Special Processing Unit [“SPU”] HUMAN SERVICES, *

* Respondent. *

*

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

Andrew Downing, Esq., Van Cott & Talam ante, PLLC, Phoenix, AZ, for petitioner. Debra Begley, Esq., US Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

DECISION ON ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS 1

Vowell, Chief Special Master:

On September 24, 2014, Diana Darken filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compens ation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq

, 2 [the “Vaccine Act” or “Progr am”]. Petitioner alleges that sh e suffered a shoulder injury that was caused-in-fact by her influenza (“flu ”) vaccination administered on October 23,

2013. Petition at 1-4. The ca se was assigned to the Specia l Processing Unit [“SPU”] of the Office of Special Masters. On Ap ril 1, 2015, I issued a decision awarding compensation to petitioner based on the parties’ Stipulation.

1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I intend to post this decision on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, in accordance with the EGovernment Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-347, § 205, 116 Stat. 2899, 2913 (codified as amended at 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2006)). In accordance with Va ccine Rule 18(b), petitioners have 14 days to identify and move to redact medical or other information, t he 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 Ac t will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa (2006).2 On March 30, 2015, the parties filed a St ipulation of Facts Concerning Attorneys’ Fees and Costs. According to the stipulat ion, the parties agree upon a total award of attorneys’ fees and costs to petitioner in the amount of $12,700.00. In accordance with General Order #9, petitioner’s counsel repr esents that petitioner incurred no out-ofpocket expenses.

The Vaccine Act permits an award of reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs. 42 U.S.C. § 300 aa-15(e). I find the proposed amount to be reasonable.

Accordingly, I award the total $12, 700.00 3 as follows:

 a lump sum in the form of a check jointly payable to petitioner and her attorney, Andrew D. Downing and Hennelly & Steadman, PLC in the amount of $2,100.00; and

 a lump sum in the form of a check payable to petitioner and her attorney, Andrew D. Downing, a nd Van Cott & Talamante, PLLC in the amount of $10, 600.00.

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

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Denise K. Vowell

Denise K. Vowell Chief Special Master

3 This amount is intended to cover all legal expenses in curred 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, 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(e)(3) prevents an a ttorney from charging or collecting fees (including costs) that would be in addition to the amount awarded herein. See generally Beck v. Sec’y, HHS , 924 F.2d 1029 (Fed. Cir.1991).

4 Entry of judgment can be expedited by each party’s fili ng of a notice renouncing the right to seek review.

See Vaccine Rule 11(a).