In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

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

VICTOR MORALES, *

* No. 17-694V

Petitioner, * Special Master Christian J. Moran

*

v. *

* Filed: May 20, 2019

SECRETARY OF HEALTH *

AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Attorneys’ fees and costs.

*

Respondent. *

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

Diana L. Stadelnikas, Maglio, Christopher & Toale, Sarasota, FL, for Petitioner;

Glenn A. MacLeod, United States Dep’t of Justice, Washington, DC, for 

Respondent.

UNPUBLISHED DECISION AWARDING 

ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS1

Victor Morales brought a successful petition for compensation in the 

National Childhood Vaccine Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §§300aa-10 

through 34 (2012). He now seeks an award for attorneys’ fees and costs. He is 

awarded $24,539.15.

* * *

 

1 Because this 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). This means the ruling will be 

available to anyone with access to the internet. In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), 

petitioners have 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 before posting the ruling.
2

Represented by Diana Stadelnikas, Mr. Morales filed a petition for 

compensation on May 25, 2017. In his petition, petitioner alleged that the flu

vaccine, which is contained in the Vaccine Injury Table, 42 C.F.R. § 100.3(a), and 

which he received on or about September 3, 2015, caused him to suffer transverse 

myelitis. 

Thanks to the efforts of both counsel for petitioner and respondent, the 

parties were able to resolve the case informally. The parties submitted a joint 

stipulation that was adopted as the decision on this petition. Decision, issued Dec. 

21, 2018, 2018 WL 7107588.

On February 13, 2019, petitioners moved for reimbursement of attorneys’ 

fees and costs, requesting $23,733.70 in attorneys’ fees and $805.45 in attorneys’ 

costs. Pet’r’s Mot. for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs, exhibit 18, 19, 24. This amount 

included $5,145.00 in fees Mr. Morales owes to his first attorney, Ms. Joanne 

Garone.

On February 22, 2019, respondent filed his response to petitioner’s motion. 

In his response, respondent stated that he was “satisfied the statutory requirements

for an award of attorneys’ fees and costs are met in this case” and deferred to the 

undersigned’s discretion to “determine a reasonable award for attorneys’ fees and 

costs.” Resp’t’s Resp., filed Feb 22, 2019, at 2-3. Petitioner submitted a reply on 

February 25, 2019. 

This matter is now ripe for adjudication.

* * *

Because Mr. Morales received compensation, he is entitled to an award of 

reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs. 42 U.S.C. § 300aa–15(e). Thus, the question 

at bar is whether Mr. Morales’ requested amount is reasonable. 

The Federal Circuit has approved the lodestar approach to determine 

reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs under the Vaccine Act. This is a two-step 

process. Avera v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs. 515 F.3d 1343, 1348 (Fed. 

Cir. 2008). First, a court determines an “initial estimate ... by ‘multiplying the 

number of hours reasonably expended on the litigation times a reasonable hourly 

rate.’” Id. at 1347-48 (quoting Blum v. Stenson, 465 U.S. 886, 888 (1984)). 

Second, the court may make an upward or downward departure from the initial 
3

calculation of the fee award based on specific findings. Id. at 1348. Here, because 

the lodestar process yields a reasonable result, no additional adjustments are 

required. 

In light of the Secretary’s lack of objection, the undersigned has reviewed 

the fee application for its reasonableness. See McIntosh v. Sec'y of Health & 

Human Servs., 139 Fed. Cl. 238 (2018).

A. Reasonable Hourly Rate

The hourly rates charged by Ms. Stadelnikas and the associates at her firm 

are in line with those previously awarded by other special masters. See, e.g., 

Hooper v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., No. 17-355V, 2019 WL 1875380, at 

*1 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Mar. 22, 2019). The undersigned agrees that the rates 

requested are reasonable. 

B. Reasonable Number of Hours

The second factor in the lodestar formula is a reasonable number of hours. 

Reasonable hours are not excessive, redundant, or otherwise unnecessary. See

Saxton v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 3 F.3d 1517, 1521 (Fed. Cir. 1993). 

The Secretary also did not directly challenge any of the requested hours as 

unreasonable. 

Ms. Stadelnikas’s billing statement is, characteristically, well-done. The line 

entries are sufficiently detailed to allow the undersigned to evaluate the 

reasonableness of the time spent on Mr. Morales’s petition. The undersigned finds 

that the number of hours billed by Ms. Stadelnikas and her associates is reasonable 

for the work performed.

C. Costs

Petitioner also request $805.45 in costs incurred by his attorney. These costs 

reflect routine costs including the court’s filing fee, costs associated with obtaining 

medical records, and shipping costs. All the requested costs are reasonable and 

awarded in full.
4

D. Attorneys’ Fees of Mr. Morales’s First Attorney

Mr. Morales also included with his request for fees an invoice from his first 

attorney, Ms. Joanne Garone. Pet’r’s Mot. for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs, exhibit

24. Ms. Garone charged a reasonable hourly rate based upon her 30 years of 

experience considering her lack of experience in the Vaccine Program. Ms. 

Garone also charged a reasonable number of hours based upon the work that she 

performed on Mr. Morales’s case. Accordingly, her requested invoice is awarded 

in full.

For the reasons stated above, petitioner is awarded:

1. A lump sum of $19,394.15 in the form of a check made payable to 

petitioner and petitioner’s attorney, Diana Stadelnikas.

2. A lump sum of $5,145.00 in the form of a check made payable to 

petitioner and petitioner’s attorney, Joanne Garone.

These amounts represent reimbursement attorneys’ fees and other litigation 

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 is directed to 

enter judgment herewith. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Christian J. Moran

Christian J. Moran

Special Master