# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 16

- 1341 V

Filed: October 10, 2018

UNPUBLISHED

WOSSEN TARIKU

,

Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent. Special Processing Unit (SPU); Attorneys’ Fees and Costs

Douglass Lee Burdette, Burdette Law, PLLC, North Bend, WA , for petitioner. Lara Ann Englund

, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

DECISION ON ATTORNEY S’ FEES AND COSTS 1

Dorsey

, Chief Special Master:

On October 14, 2016 , 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 he suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”), which was caused

- in

- fact by one or both of the vaccinations he received on September 8, 2015

– the Fluzone Quad or Flulaval quadriva lent influenza (“flu”) vaccine, and Tetanus Diphtheria acellular Pertussis (“Tdap”) vaccine

. Petition at 1

. On August 29, 2018 , the undersigned issued a decision awarding compensation to petitioner based on the respondent’s proffer

. (ECF No. 49 )

.

1 The undersigned intends to post this decision on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website.

This means the decision 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, the undersigned agrees that the iden tified material fits within this definition, the undersigned will redact such material from public access. Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, undersigned is required to post it on the United State s Court of Federal Claims'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).

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 pertin ent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa (2012).2

On September 19, 2018 , petitioner filed a motion for attorneys’ fees and costs. (ECF No. 54 )

. Petitioner requests attorneys’ fees in the amount of $ 13,995.25 and attorneys’ costs in the amount of $ 1,667.80

. Id. at 2

. In compliance with General Order #9, petitioner filed a signed statement indicating that petitioner incurred no out

- of

- pocket

expenses. Id. at 3. Thus, the total amount requested is $ 15,663.05

.

On September 28, 2018 , respondent filed a response to petitioner’s motion. (ECF No. 55 )

. R espondent argues that “[n]either the Vaccine Act nor Vaccine Rule 13 contemplates any role for respondent in the resolution of a request by a petitioner for an award of attorneys’ fe es and costs.” Id. at 1. Respondent adds, however, that he “is satisfied the statutory requirements for an award of attorneys’ fees and costs are met in

this case.” Id. at 2. Respondent “respectfully recommends that the Chief Special

Master exercise he r discretion and determine a reasonable award for attorneys’ fees

and costs.” Id. at 3.

Petitioner has filed no reply.

The undersigned has reviewed the billing records submitted with petitioner’s request. In the undersigned’s experience, the request appears reasonable, and the undersigned finds no cause to reduce the requested hours or rates.

The Vaccine Act permits a n award of reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs. § 15(e). Based on the reasonableness of petitioner’s request , the undersigned

GRANTS petitioner’s motion for attorneys’ fees and costs.

Accordingly , the undersigned awards the total of $ 15,663.05 3 as a lump sum in the form of a check jointly payable to petitioner and petitioner’s counsel Douglass Lee Burdette

.

T he clerk of the court shall enter judgment in accordance herewith. 4

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Nora Beth Dorsey Nora Beth Dorsey Chief Special Master

3 This amount is intended to cover all legal expenses incurred in this matter. This award encompasse s 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 h erein. See generally Beck v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs.

, 924 F.2d 1029 (Fed. Cir.1991).

4 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment can be expedited by the parties’ joint filing of notice renouncing the right to seek review.