# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 20

- 0006 V (not to be published)

ELAINE VASILOPOULOS

,

Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent. Chief Special Master Corcoran

Filed: September 27, 2022

Special Processing Unit (SPU); Attorney’s Fees and Costs

Leah VaSahnja Durant, Law Offices of Leah V. Durant, PLLC, Washington, DC , for
P etitioner.

Catherine Elizabeth Stolar , U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for
R espondent.

DECISION ON ATTORNEY ’ S FEES AND COSTS 1

On January 3, 2020

, Elaine Vasilopoulos 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 she suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine

administration as a result of a tetanus

- diphtheria

- acellular pertussis vaccine administered on August 22, 2018. Petit ion at 1

. On February 14, 2022

, a decision was issued awarding compensation to P etitioner based on the R espondent ’ s proffer

. ECF No. 39

.

1 Because this unpublished D ecision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in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 E

Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of Electronic Government Services). This means the D ecision 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 section references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subpara graph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa (2012 ).2 Petitioner has now filed a motion for attorney’s fees and costs, dated August 15

, 2022 (ECF No. 39 ) , requesting a n award of $ 34,509.24 (representing $ 33,156.00 in fees and $ 1,353.24 in costs). In accordance with General Order No. 9, Petitioner filed a signed

statement indicating that she incurred out

- of

- pocket expenses in the amount of $ 400.00

. Id. at 2. Respondent reacted to the motion on August 16 , 2022

, indicating that he is satisfied that the statutory requirements for an award of attorney’s fees and costs are met

in this case

, but deferring resolution of the amount to be awarded at the Court’s discretion

. ECF No. 45

. On August 17 , 2022

, P etitioner filed a reply requesting “the Court award petitioner all fees and costs requested in Petitioner’s Application”

. ECF No. 4 6

.

I have reviewed the billing records submitted with P etitioner’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

. Section 15(e). Accordingly

, P etitioner is awarded the total amount of $ 34,909.24 3 as follows:

• A lump sum of $ 34,509.24 , representing reimbursement for attorneys’ fees and costs, in the form of a check payable jointly to P etitioner and
P etitioner’s counsel, Leah VaSahnja Durant ; and

• A lump sum of $ 400.00 , representing reimbursement for P etitioner’s costs, in the form of a check payable to P etitioner.

In the absence of a timely

- filed motion for review (see Appendix B to the Rules of the Court), the Clerk shall enter judgment in accordance with this decision. 4

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Brian H. Corcoran
Brian H. Corcoran Chief Special Master

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 amoun t awarded herein. See generally Beck v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs.

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

4 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties may expedite entry of judgment by filing a joint notice renouncing their right to seek review.