# ORIGINAL 3n tlje Winitth States? Court of Jfeberal Claim*
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS 

### No. 08-743V r- . . r- p. 

## Filed: January 12, 2016 l~ IL t U

**************** UNPUBLISHED JAN 11 2016 RICHARD WILLIAMS-O'BANION, * 0SM 

### Special Master Hamilton-^ftjSgffiOF, Petitioner,

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Former Attorneys' Fees and Costs; * Reasonable Amount Requested to * which Respondent Does Not Object.

Respondent. *

**************** Richard Williams-O'Banion, Pro se. Lara A. Englund, United States Department ofJustice, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

DECISION1
On October 20, 2008, Richard Williams-O'Banion ("Petitioner") filed a petition pursuant 

### to theNational Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.2 Petitioner alleged that aninfluenza ("flu") vaccine administered on October 28, 2005, caused him to suffer from neurological injuries. Petition, dated October 17, 2008, at 1. Petitioner was represented by counsel, Mr. Ronald C. Homer, when he initially filed his 

### petition. Seegenerally Petition. Mr. Homer represented Petitioner for several months, before he filed a Motion to Withdraw on July 31, 2009. Motion, dated July 31, 2009. The Motion was

1Because this decision contains a reasoned explanation for the undersigned's action in this case, the undersigned intends to post this decision on the website ofthe United States Court ofFederal Claims, in accordance with the E-Government Act of2002, Pub. L. No. 107-347, § 205, 116 Stat. 2899, 2913 (codified as amended at 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2006)). As provided by Vaccine Rule 18(b), each party has 14 days within which to request redaction "ofany information furnished by that party: (1) that is a trade secret or commercial or financial in substance and is privileged or confidential; or (2) that includes medical files or similar files, the disclosure ofwhich would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion ofprivacy." Vaccine Rule 18(b). 

### 2The Program comprises Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-10et seq. (hereinafter Vaccine Act or the Act). Hereafter, individual section references will be to 42 U.S.C. § 300aa ofthe Act.

### granted onSeptember 7, 2010. Order, dated September 7, 2010. Petitioner did notretain another attorney andproceeded Prose throughout the remaining duration of his case. 

### On July25, 2014, the undersigned issued a decision dismissing this case forinsufficient proofofcausation. Decision, datedJuly 25, 2014. Judgment on the dismissal decision was entered on August29, 2014. Judgment, dated August 29, 2014. On January 5, 2015, Mr. Homer filed a Motion for Leave to file an application for Attorneys' Fees and Costs ("Motion for 

### Leave"). Motion, dated January 5, 2015. The Motion for Leave was necessary because, 

### according to Mr. Homer, Petitioner refused to allowMr. Homer to "becomethe attorney of record" for the purpose offiling a motion for attorneys' fees and costs. Motion forLeave, at 3. OnJanuary 26, 2015, Respondent filed herResponse to Petitioner's Motion for Leave 

### ("Respondent's Response"), arguing thatMr. Homer did nothave standing to file hismotion for attorneys' fees and costs, and that there was no reasonable basis for filing the petition. Respondent's Response, at 2-3. Finally, on February 18, 2015, Mr. Homer filed his Reply to Respondent's Response ("Former Counsel's Reply"). On October 29, 2015, the undersigned issued an Order, in which she determined that Petitioner's former counsel has standing to file for 

### attorneys' fees and costs, and she granted his Motion forLeave. Order, dated October29, 2015.
On November 23, 2015, in compliance with General Order #9, the undersigned granted 

### Petitioner"an opportunity to request reimbursement for any documented claim-related costs he 

### personally incurred during the period he was represented by Mr. Homer." Order, dated November 23, 2015. The undersigned stated that "[a]ny requests for costs submitted after 

### [Wednesday, December 16, 2015] will not be considered for reimbursement." Id. To date, the Court has received no correspondence from Petitioner and no requests for reimbursement. After the undersigned granted Petitioner's former counsel's Motion for Leave, 

### Respondent filed a Stipulation of Facts Concerning Attorneys' Fees and Costs, in which Petitioner's former counsel and Respondent agree to the amount offees and costs to be awarded 

### to Mr. Homer. Stipulation, dated November 19, 2015. Pursuant to their Stipulation, Petitioner's former counsel and Respondent have agreed to an award of $12,000.00 in attorneys' fees and costs. As noted above, Petitioner was given additional time to request reimbursement for out-of

### pocket litigation costs in pursuit of his claim; however, he did not submit a request for reimbursement. The undersigned finds that this petition was brought in good faith and that there existed a reasonable basis for the claim. Therefore, an award for fees and costs is appropriate, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(b) and (e)(1). Further, the proposed amount seems reasonable and appropriate. Accordingly, the undersigned hereby awards the amount of$12,000.00, in the form ofa check made payablejointly to Petitioner and Petitioner's former counsel, Ronald C. Homer, at Conway Homer & Chin-Caplan, P.C, 16 Shawmut Street, Boston, MA 02116.
The Clerk ofCourt is instructed to provide a copy ofthis Decision to Mr. Ronald Homer, 16 Shawmut Street, Boston, MA 02116.

### In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the clerk of the court SHALL ENTER JUDGMENT in accordance with the terms ofthe parties' 

### stipulation.3

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Lisa Hamilton-Fieldman Special Master

3Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment is expedited by the parties' joint filing of notice renouncing the right to seek review.