In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 17-1279V 

(not to be published)

RONALD BECKMAN,

 Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES,

 Respondent.

Chief Special Master Corcoran

Filed: January 10, 2020

Special Processing Unit (SPU); 

Attorney’s Fees and Costs

Kate Gerayne Westad, SibenCarey, Minneapolis, MN, for Petitioner.

Glenn Alexander MacLeod, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for 

Respondent.

DECISION ON ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS1

On September 18, 2017, Ronald Beckman (“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”) as a result of his September 19, 2014 

influenza (“flu”) vaccination. (Petition at 1). On June 6, 2019, a decision was issued 

awarding compensation to Petitioner based on the Respondent’s proffer. (ECF No. 40.) 

 1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am 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 EGovernment Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of Electronic 

Government Services). 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, 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 pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa 

(2012).
2

Petitioner has now filed a motion for attorney’s fees and costs, dated December 

11, 2019, (ECF No. 45), requesting a total award of $28,081.69 (representing $3,696.25

in fees and costs incurred by counsel’s current firm Sieben Carey P.A., $23,422.94 in 

fees and costs incurred by counsel’s former firm Larkin Hoffman Law Firm and $962.50 

from incurred by counsels former firm Lommen Abdo, P.A.). In accordance with General

Order #9 Petitioner filed a signed statement indicating that Petitioner incurred no out-ofpocket expenses. (ECF No. 46). Respondent reacted to the motion on December 17, 

2019 indicating that he is satisfied that the statutory 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. (ECF No. 47). Petitioner did not file a reply 

thereafter. 

I have reviewed the billing records submitted with Petitioner’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, petitioner is awarded the total amount of $28, 081.693 as 

follows:

• A lump sum of $3,696.25, representing reimbursement for attorneys’ 

fees and costs, in the form of a check payable jointly to Petitioner 

and Sieben Carey P.A., and

• A lump sum of $23,422.94, representing reimbursement for 

attorneys’ fees and costs, in the form of a check payable jointly to 

Petitioner and the Larkin Hoffman Law Firm; and

• A lump sum of $962.50, representing reimbursement for attorneys’ 

fees and costs, in the form of a check payable jointly to Petitioner 

and the firm of Lommen Abdo, P.A.

 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).
3

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Brian H. Corcoran

Brian H. Corcoran

Chief Special Master