In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS 

No. 13-937V 

(Not to be Published) 

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

 * 

JOHN JASTISAN, * 

 * 

 Petitioner, * Filed: October 17, 2016 

 * 

 v. * Decision; Attorney’s Fees and Costs. 

 * 

 * 

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND * 

HUMAN SERVICES, * 

 * 

 Respondent. * 

 * 

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

Paul R. Brazil, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA, for Petitioner. 

Traci R. Patton, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. 

ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS DECISION1

On November 26, 2013, John Jastisan filed a petition seeking compensation under the 

National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (“Vaccine Program”), alleging, among other 

things, that the influenza (“flu”) vaccine he received on September 16, 2011, caused him to develop 

Guillain-Barré Syndrome (“GBS”) and/or Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy 

(“CIDP”).2

 ECF No. 1. This matter was originally set for hearing in May of this year; however, 

the parties were able to reach an informal settlement agreement and requested I issue a “15-Week” 

 

1

 Because this decision contains a reasoned explanation for my actions in this case, I will 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 (2012). As 

provided by 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-12(d)(4)(B), however, the parties may object to the published decision’s inclusion of 

certain kinds of confidential information. Specifically, under Vaccine Rule 18(b), each party has fourteen days within 

which to request redaction “of any 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 

of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy.” Vaccine Rule 18(b). Otherwise, the whole 

decision will be available to the public. Id. 

2

 The Vaccine Program comprises Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 

100 Stat. 3758, codified as amended at 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-10 through 34 (2012) (“Vaccine Act” or “the Act”). 

Individual section references hereafter will be to § 300aa of the Act (but will omit that statutory prefix). 
2 

Order, which I did. ECF No. 34. The parties then filed their stipulation for an award of damages 

on August 4, 2016 (ECF No. 37), and I adopted the stipulation as my decision granting damages 

on August 10, 2016. ECF No. 38. 

Petitioner has now filed a motion for final attorney’s fees and costs, dated October 7, 2016. 

ECF No. 43. Petitioner requests reimbursement of attorney’s fees and costs in the amount of 

$51,278.90. Id. Respondent has formally represented that she does not object to the sum requested. 

ECF No. 44. In addition, and in compliance with General Order No. 9, Petitioner represents that 

he has not incurred any out-of-pocket, litigation-related expenses in conjunction with this 

proceeding. ECF No. 43. 

I approve the requested amount for attorney’s fees and costs as reasonable. Accordingly, 

an award of $51,278.90 should be made in the form of a check payable jointly to Petitioner and 

Petitioner’s counsel, Paul R. Brazil, Esq. Payment of this amount represents all attorney’s fees and 

costs available under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(e). 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 of Petitioner’s motion.3

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

 /s/ Brian H. Corcoran

 Brian H. Corcoran 

 Special Master 

 

3

 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties may expedite entry of judgment by each filing (either jointly or separately) 

a notice renouncing their right to seek review.