# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 18

- 1511 V (not to be published)

MICHELLE ROY

,

Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent. Chief Special Master Corcoran

Filed: September 2, 2020

Special Processing Unit (SPU);
Attorney’s Fees and Costs

Jessica Olins, Maglio Christopher & Toale, PA, Seattle, WA , for P etitioner.

Debra A. Filteau Begley , U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for R espondent.

DECISION ON ATTORNEY ’ S FEES AND COSTS 1

On September 28, 2018, Michelle Roy 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 as a result of her November 4, 2015 influneza vaccination. ( Petition at 1 )

. On May 22, 2020

, a decision was issued awarding compensation to P etitioner based on

the Respondent’s proffer

. (ECF No. 43 )

.

1 Because this unpublished D ecision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in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) (Fe deral Management and Promotion of Electronic Government Services). This means the D ecision 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 per tinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa (2012).2 Petitioner has now filed a motion for attorney’s fees and costs, dated July 2, 2020

, (ECF No. 47 ) , requesting a total award of $ 22,275.63 (representing $ 21,478.60 in fees
and $ 797.03 in costs). In accordance with General Order #9

, Petitioner filed a signed

statement indicating that she incurred no out

- of

- pocket expenses. (ECF No. 47

- 3 ).
Respondent reacted to the motion on July 16, 2020 indicating that he is satisfied that the

statut ory 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. On July 16, 2020

, P etitioner filed a reply requesting the amount of fees and costs be awarded in full

. (ECF

No. 49 )

.

I have reviewed the billing records submitted with P etitioner’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

, P etitioner is awarded the total amount of $ 22,275.63 3 as follows:

• A lump sum of $ 22,275.63 , representing $21,478.60 in attorneys’ fees

and $797.03 costs, in the form of a check payable jointly to

P etitioner and P etitioner’s counsel

.

• Pe titioner requests that check be forwarded to Magli o Christopher &

T o ale, PA, 160 5 Main Street, Su ite 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. 4

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Brian H. Corcoran

Brian H. Corcoran 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 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), the parties may expedite entry of judgment by filing a joint notice renouncing their right to seek review.