In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 14-1064V 

Filed: November 9, 2015 

Not for Publication

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

MARC COSENTINO, * 

 * 

Petitioner, * 

 * Attorneys’ fees and costs decision; 

 * reasonable hourly rate 

 v. * 

 * 

SECRETARY OF HEALTH * 

AND HUMAN SERVICES, * 

 * 

 Respondent. * 

* 

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

Ronald C. Homer, Boston, MA, for petitioner. 

Claudia B. Gangi, Washington, DC, for respondent. 

MILLMAN, Special Master

DECISION AWARDING ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS1

On October 31, 2014, petitioner filed a petition under the National Childhood Vaccine 

Injury Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-10¬34 (2012) (“Vaccine Act”), alleging that he suffered

Transverse Myelitis as a result of his receipt of the Tetanus-diphtheria-acellular-pertussis (“Tdap”) 

and influenza (“flu”) vaccinations on November 6, 2012. The parties filed a stipulation on 

damages on June 12, 2015. The undersigned issued a decision pursuant to the stipulation on the 

same date, awarding petitioner $200,000 in compensation. 

On October 16, 2015, petitioner filed a Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs, requesting 

$12,917.00 in attorneys’ fees, $278.99 in attorneys’ costs, and $400.00 in petitioner’s costs. On 

November 2, 2015, respondent filed a response to petitioner’s motion. Although respondent 

1 Vaccine Rule 18(b) states that all decisions of the special masters will be made available to the public 

unless they contain trade secrets or commercial or financial information that is privileged and 

confidential, or medical or similar information whose disclosure would constitute a clearly unwarranted 

invasion of privacy. When such a decision is filed, petitioners have 14 days to identify and move to 

redact such information prior to the document’s disclosure. If the special master, upon review, agrees 

that the identified material fits within the banned categories listed above, the special master shall redact

such material from public access.

 
raised an objection to the hourly rates requested by petitioners’ counsel in this case2

, she declined 

in light of the decision in McCulloch v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, No. 09-293V, 

2015 WL 5634323 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Sept. 1, 2015), to further litigate that issue and instead 

“respectfully defers to the special master’s statutory discretion in determining a reasonable fee 

award for this case.” Resp’t’s Response, at 2. The matter is now ripe for adjudication. 

The Vaccine Act permits an award of “reasonable attorneys’ fees” and “other costs.” 

42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(e)(1). Counsel must not include in their fee requests hours that are 

“excessive, redundant, or otherwise unnecessary.” Saxton v. Sec’y of HHS, 3 F.3d 1517, 1521 

(Fed. Cir. 1993) (quoting Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424, 434 (1983)). It is “well within the 

special master’s discretion to reduce the hours to a number that, in [her] experience and judgment, 

[is] reasonable for the work done.” Id. Furthermore, the special master may reduce fees sua 

sponte, apart from objections raised by respondent and without providing petitioners notice and 

opportunity to respond. See Sabella v. Sec’y of HHS, 86 Fed. Cl. 201, 208–09 (Fed. Cl. 2009). 

A special master need not engage in a line-by-line analysis of petitioner’s fee application when 

reducing fees. Broekelschen v. Sec’y of HHS, 102 Fed. Cl. 719, 729 (Fed. Cl. 2011). 

For the same reasons given in Tomlinson, the undersigned reduces the amount of fees 

awarded to petitioner’s counsel for the review work done by attorney Ronald Homer. Tomlinson 

v. Sec'y of HHS, No. 13-736V, issued October 23, 2015, at 6-7. Mr. Homer billed $840.00 for 

his work on this case. The undersigned has reviewed the billings submitted by petitioner’s 

counsel, and finds that roughly 85% of the work done by Mr. Homer on this case was review work. 

Therefore, she will reduce 85% of Mr. Homer’s time, or $714.00, by 25%, the percentage 

difference between Mr. Homer’s hourly rate and the hourly rate of Christine Ciampolillo, the 

attorney most closely involved in the case. Therefore, the undersigned reduces petitioner’s 

fees by $178.50. 

The undersigned finds an award of attorneys’ fees and costs appropriate. In sum, the 

undersigned awards petitioner the following amount for attorneys’ fees and costs: 

 Requested Attorneys’ Fees: $12,917.00 

Reductions: $178.50 

Attorneys’ Fees Awarded: $12,738.50

Requested Attorneys’ Costs: $278.99 

Reductions: $0.00 

Attorneys’ Costs Awarded: $278.99 

Requested Petitioner’s Costs: $400.00 

Reductions: $0.00 

2 Respondent indicated that she stands by the arguments and evidence she put forth in Tomlinson v. 

Secretary of Health and Human Services, 13-736V, pertaining to the appropriate hourly rates for 

petitioner’s counsel. Resp’t’s Response, at 1. 

2 

 
Petitioner’s Costs Awarded: $400.00

Attorneys’ Fees & Costs Awarded: $13,017.49

Petitioner’s Costs Awarded: $400.00

Total Requested Fees & Costs: $13,595.99 

Total Fees & Costs Awarded: $13,417.49 

Accordingly, the court awards:

a. $13,017.49, representing attorneys’ fees and costs. The award shall be in the form of 

a check made payable jointly to petitioner and Conway, Homer & Chin-Caplan in the 

amount of $13,017.49; and 

b. $400.00, representing petitioner’s costs. The award shall be in the form of a check 

made payable to petitioner for $400.00.

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.3

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 9, 2015 /s/ Laura D. Millman

 Laura D. Millman

 Special Master

3

 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment can be expedited by each party, either separately or 

jointly, filing a notice renouncing the right to seek review.

3