In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 16-697V

(Not to be published)

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

KENDALL REICHERT, *

* Special Master Corcoran

Petitioner, * 

* Dated: December 4, 2018

v. * 

* Attorney’s Fees and Costs.

* 

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND *

HUMAN SERVICES, *

*

Respondent. *

*

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

Michael G. McLaren, Black McLaren Jones Ryland & Griffee, P.C., Memphis, TN, for 

Petitioner.

David G. Cutler, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

DECISION GRANTING FINAL AWARD OF ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS1

On June 14, 2016, Kendall Reichert filed a petition seeking compensation under the 

National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (“Vaccine Program”)

2

alleging that he suffered

from Guillain-Barre Syndrome (“GBS”) as a result of receiving the influenza (“flu”) vaccine on 

October 22, 2014. I held an entitlement hearing on April 6, 2018, in Washington, DC, and denied 

entitlement in a decision dated August 2, 2018 (ECF No. 56), with the matter subsequently being 

 

1 Although this Decision has been formally designated “not to be published,” it will nevertheless be posted on the 

Court of Federal Claims’ website in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002, 44 U.S.C. § 3501 (2012)). This 

means that the Decision will be available to anyone with access to the internet. As provided by 42 U.S.C. § 300aa12(d)(4)(B), however, the parties may object to the Decision’s inclusion of certain kinds of confidential information. 

Specifically, under Vaccine Rule 18(b), each party has fourteen days within which to request redaction “of any 

information furnished by that party: (1) that is a trade secret or commercial or financial in substance and is privileged 

or confidential; or (2) that includes medical files or similar files, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly 

unwarranted invasion of privacy.” Vaccine Rule 18(b). Otherwise, the whole Decision will be available to the public. 

Id.

2 The Vaccine Program comprises Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 

100 Stat. 3758, codified as amended at 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-10 through 34 (2012) [hereinafter “Vaccine Act” or “the 

Act”]. Individual section references hereafter will be to § 300aa of the Act (but will omit that statutory prefix).
2

dismissed by judgment on August 28, 2018 (ECF No. 59).

Petitioner previously received an interim award of attorney’s fees and costs in the total 

amount of $92,204.76. See Decision, dated June 20, 2018 (ECF No. 54); Judgment, dated July 23, 

2018 (ECF No. 55). Petitioner has now filed a request for a final award of fees and costs, in the 

total sum of $4,412.99 (reflecting $4,371.50 in attorney’s fees, plus $41.49 in costs). See Motion, 

dated October 29, 2018 (ECF No. 62). Petitioner specifically requests reimbursement for attorney 

work performed between June 2018 and October 2018, and includes work performed in the 

preparation of the final fee application. Id. at Ex. 2. Respondent reacted to the motion the same 

day it was filed, representing that the statutory and other legal requirements for an award of 

attorneys’ fees and costs had been met, and otherwise deferring the calculation of a reasonable 

final award to my discretion. See generally ECF No. 63.

The requested fees and costs seem reasonable overall in terms of the work performed, and 

the rates requested are consistent with those awarded in my interim fees decision. Accordingly, in 

the exercise of the discretion afforded to me in determining the propriety of interim fees awards, 

and based on the foregoing, I GRANT Petitioner’s Motion, and award a total of $4,412.99 in fees 

and costs as a lump sum in the form of a check jointly payable to Petitioner and Petitioner’s 

counsel, Mr. Michael G. McLaren.

In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the clerk of the 

court SHALL ENTER JUDGMENT in accordance with the terms of this decision.

3

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Brian H. Corcoran

Brian H. Corcoran

Special Master

 

3 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties may expedite entry of judgment if (jointly or separately) they file notices 

renouncing their right to seek review.