In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

Filed: December 23, 2020

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * UNPUBLISHED

LYNN JONES, *

*

Petitioner, * No. 19-984V

* Special Master Oler

v. *

 * Attorneys’ Fees and Costs

SECRETARY OF HEALTH * 

AND HUMAN SERVICES, *

 *

 Respondent. *

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

Anne C. Toale, Maglio Christopher & Toale, PA, Sarasota, FL, for Petitioner.

Colleen C. Hartley, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

DECISION ON ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS1

On July 10, 2019, Lynn Jones (“Petitioner”) filed a petition for compensation under the

National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.

2 Petitioner alleged that he suffered from 

Guillain-Barré syndrome as a result of the influenza vaccination he received on October 19, 2018. 

Pet. at 1, 5. On August 14, 2020, Petitioner filed a motion to dismiss her petition. ECF No. 23. The

undersigned file her Decision dismissing the Petitioner on August 17, 2020. ECF No. 24.

On September 4, 2020, Petitioner filed an application for final attorneys’ fees and costs. 

ECF No. 28 (“Fees App.”). Petitioner requests total attorneys’ fees and costs in the amount of 

$30,149.94, representing $27,823.90 in attorneys’ fees and $2,326.04 in attorneys’ costs. Fees 

App. at 1. Pursuant to General Order No. 9, Petitioner states that she has not incurred any costs 

related to this litigation. ECF No. 28 Ex 3. That same day Respondent responded to the motion

stating that “Respondent is satisfied the statutory requirements for an award of attorneys’ fees and 

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

means the Ruling 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 identified material fits within this definition, the undersigned will redact such material from 

public access. Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, 

the undersigned is 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) (Federal Management and Promotion 

of Electronic Government Services).

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755.
2

costs are met in this case” and requesting that the undersigned “exercise her discretion and 

determine a reasonable award for attorneys’ fees and costs.” Resp’t’s Resp. at 2-3, ECF No. 29. 

Petitioner filed her reply on September 4, 2020, requesting and entry of fees and costs in the full 

amount requested. ECF No. 30. 

This matter is now ripe for consideration.

I. Reasonable Attorneys’ Fees and Costs

Section 15(e) (1) of the Vaccine Act allows for the Special Master to award “reasonable 

attorneys' fees, and other costs.” § 300aa–15(e)(1)(A)–(B). Petitioners are entitled to an award of 

reasonable attorneys' fees and costs if they are entitled to compensation under the Vaccine Act, or, 

even if they are unsuccessful, they are eligible so long as the Special Master finds that the petition 

was filed in good faith and with a reasonable basis. Avera v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 515 

F.3d 1343, 1352 (Fed. Cir. 2008). Here, although the petition was eventually dismissed, the 

undersigned does not doubt that it was filed in a good faith belief that Petitioner’s vaccination 

caused her injury, and there was a reasonable basis for the claim to proceed as long as it did.

Accordingly, Petitioner is entitled to a final award of reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs.

It is “well within the special master's discretion” to determine the reasonableness of fees. 

Saxton v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 3 F.3d 1517, 1521–22 (Fed. Cir. 1993); see also Hines 

v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 22 Cl. Ct. 750, 753 (1991). (“[T]he reviewing court must grant 

the special master wide latitude in determining the reasonableness of both attorneys' fees and 

costs.”). Applications for attorneys' fees must include contemporaneous and specific billing 

records that indicate the work performed and the number of hours spent on said work. See Savin 

v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 85 Fed. Cl. 313, 316–18 (2008).

Reasonable hourly rates are determined by looking at the “prevailing market rate” in the 

relevant community. See Blum v. Stenson, 465 U.S. 886, 895 (1984). The “prevailing market rate” 

is akin to the rate “in the community for similar services by lawyers of reasonably comparable 

skill, experience and reputation.” Id. at 895, n.11. The petitioner bears the burden of providing 

adequate evidence to prove that the requested hourly rate is reasonable. Id.

a. Reasonable Hourly Rates

Petitioner requests the following hourly rates for the work of her counsel Ms. Anne Carrion 

Toale, attorneys and paralegals of Maglio Christopher & Toale: 

2018 2019 2020

A. Toale - $420 $445

A. Maglio $381 $400 -

D. Strait $322 - -

Paralegals $148 $154 $160
3

These hourly rates are consistent with what Ms. Toale, her fellow attorneys and paralegals 

have previously been awarded for their Vaccine Program work, and the undersigned finds them to 

be reasonable herein.

b. Reasonable Hours Expended

Attorneys' fees are awarded for the “number of hours reasonably expended on the 

litigation.” Avera, 515 F.3d at 1348. Counsel should not include in their fee requests hours that are 

“excessive, redundant, or otherwise unnecessary.” Saxton, 3 F.3d at 1521 (quoting Hensley v. 

Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424, 434 (1983)). Additionally, it is well-established that billing for 

administrative/clerical tasks is not permitted in the Vaccine Program. Rochester v. United States, 

18 Cl. Ct. 379, 387 (1989); Arranga v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., No. 02-1616V, 2018 WL 

2224959, at *3 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Apr. 12, 2018).

Upon review, the undersigned finds the overall hours billed to be reasonable and awards

the full amount.

c. Attorneys’ Costs

Like attorneys’ fees, a request for reimbursement of attorneys’ costs must be reasonable. 

Perreira v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 27 Fed. Cl. 29, 34 (Fed. Cl. 1992). Petitioner requests 

a total of $2,326.04 in attorneys’ costs. Fees App. at 28, Ex 2. This amount is comprised of 

acquiring medical records, postage, travel costs and the Court’s filing fee. All of these costs are 

typical of Vaccine Program litigation and are reasonable in the undersigned’s experience.

Petitioner is awarded the full amount of costs requested.

II. Conclusion

In accordance with the Vaccine Act, 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(e) (2012), the undersigned has 

reviewed the billing records and costs in this case and finds that Petitioner’s request for fees and 

costs is reasonable. The undersigned finds that it is reasonable to compensate Petitioner and her

counsel as follows:

Attorneys’ Fees Requested $27,823.90

(Reduction to Fees)

Total Attorneys’ Fees Awarded $27,823.90

Attorneys’ Costs Requested $2,326.04

(Reduction to Costs)

Total Attorneys’ Costs Awarded $2,326.04

Total Amount Awarded $30,149.94

Accordingly, the undersigned awards a lump sum in the amount of $30,149.94, 

representing reimbursement for reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs, in the form of a check 
4

payable jointly to Petitioner and Petitioner’s counsel of record, Ms. Anne Carrion Toale, to 

be forwarded to Maglio Christopher & Toale, PA, 1605 Main Street, Suite 710, Sarasota, 

Florida 34236.

In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the clerk of the 

court shall enter judgment in accordance herewith.3

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Katherine E. Oler

 Katherine E. Oler

Special Master

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

Vaccine Rule 11(a).