# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 15

- 1257 V

Filed: September 23, 2016

U npublished

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * LINDA ST. GEORGE

, *

* Petitioner, *

v. *

* Attorney s’ Fees and Costs;

SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Special Processing Unit (“SPU”)

AND HUMAN SERVICES

, *

* Respondent. *

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Diana Sedar, Maglio Christopher and Toale, PA, Sarasota, FL

, f or petitioner.

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

DECISION ON ATTORNEY S’ FEES AND COSTS 1

Dorsey

, Chief Special Master:

On October 27, 2015

, p etitioner 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 alleged that s he suffered from Guillain

- Barré Syndrome (“GBS”) as a result of receiving the influenza (“flu”) vaccine on August 25, 2014

. On September 12, 2016

, the undersigned issued a decision awarding compensation to petitioner based on the parties ’ joint stipulation

. (ECF No. 31 ).

On September 23, 2016

, petitioner filed an unopposed motion for attorneys’ fees and costs. (ECF No. 35 ). 3 Petitioner requests attorneys’ fees in the amount of

1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the undersigned intends to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, in accordance wi th

the E

- Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of Electronic Government Services). In accordance with Va ccine 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

wi thin this definition, the undersigned 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).

3 In the motion, petitioner states that respondent d oes not object to the overall amount sought, but notes that the lack of objection should not be construed as an admission, concession, or waiver as to any of the2 $1 7,759.40 and attorneys’ costs in the amount of $1 ,554.73 for a total amount of $1 9,314.13

. Id. at 2

. In compliance with General Order #9, petitioner has filed a signed statement indicating petitioner incur red no out

- of

- pocket expenses.

The Vaccine Act permits an award of reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs. § 15(e). Based on the reasonableness of petitioner’s request and the lack of opposition from respondent , the undersigned GRANTS petitioner’s mo tion for attorneys’ fees and

costs.

Accordingly , the undersigned award s the total of $1 9,314.13 4 as a lump sum in the form of a check jointly payable to petitioner and petitioner’s counsel

D iana L. Stadelnikas Sedar

. 5

T he clerk of the court shall enter judgment in accordance herewith. 6

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Nora Beth Dorsey Nora Beth Dorsey Chief Special Master

matters raised by petitioner ’ s request for attorneys ’ fees and costs, including but not limited to the hourly rates requested, the number of hours requested, and other litigation

- re lated costs. Motion at 2.

4 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.

Furthermo re, § 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).

5 Petitioner requests that the check be forwarded to Maglio Christopher & Toale, PA, 1605 Main Street, Suite 710, Sarasota, FL 342 36.

6 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.