In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 20-1112V 

(not to be published)

SHANEL MAYO,

 Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES,

 Respondent.

Chief Special Master Corcoran

Filed: August 26, 2022

Special Processing Unit (SPU); 

Attorney’s Fees and Costs

Leigh Finfer, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA, for Petitioner.

Ryan Daniel Pyles, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

DECISION ON ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS1

On September 1, 2020, Shanel Mayo 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 Table injury – a Shoulder Injury

Related to Vaccine Administration as a result of an influenza vaccination received on 

September 26, 2019. (Petition at 1). On April 28, 2022, a decision was issued awarding 

compensation to Petitioner based on the parties’ stipulation. (ECF No. 26).

1 Because this unpublished Decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am 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 EGovernment Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of Electronic 

Government Services). This means the Decision 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 subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 

300aa (2012).
2

Petitioner has now filed a motion for attorney’s fees and costs, dated July 11, 2022

(ECF No. 31), requesting a total award of $9,678.23 (representing $9,160.00 in fees and 

$518.23 in costs). In accordance with General Order No. 9, counsel for Petitioner 

represents that Petitioner incurred no out-of-pocket expenses. (Id. at 2). Respondent 

reacted to the motion on July 12, 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 to my discretion. (ECF No. 32). Petitioner did not 

file a reply thereafter.

I have reviewed the billing records submitted with Petitioner’s requests and find a 

reduction in the amount of fees to be awarded appropriate, for the reason listed below. 

ANALYSIS

The Vaccine Act permits an award of reasonable attorney’s fees and costs. Section

15(e). Counsel must submit fee requests that include contemporaneous and specific 

billing records indicating the service performed, the number of hours expended on the 

service, and the name of the person performing the service. See Savin v. Sec’y of Health 

& Human Servs., 85 Fed. Cl. 313, 316-18 (2008). Counsel should not include in their fee 

requests hours that are “excessive, redundant, or otherwise unnecessary.” Saxton v. 

Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 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. at 1522. Furthermore, the special master may reduce a fee request 

sua sponte, apart from objections raised by respondent and without providing a petitioner 

notice and opportunity to respond. See Sabella v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 86 

Fed. Cl. 201, 209 (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 Health & Human 

Servs., 102 Fed. Cl. 719, 729 (2011).

The petitioner “bears the burden of establishing the hours expended, the rates 

charged, and the expenses incurred.” Wasson v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 24 Cl. 

Ct. 482, 484 (1991). The Petitioner “should present adequate proof [of the attorney’s fees 

and costs sought] at the time of the submission.” Wasson, 24 Cl. Ct. at 484 n.1. 

Petitioner’s counsel “should make a good faith effort to exclude from a fee request hours 

that are excessive, redundant, or otherwise unnecessary, just as a lawyer in private 

practice ethically is obligated to exclude such hours from his fee submission.” Hensley, 

461 U.S. at 434.
3

ATTORNEY FEES

Petitioner requests the following rates for attorney Leigh Finfer and the attorneys 

of Muller Brazil as follows: 

2019 2020 2021 2022

Leigh Finfer $185 $200 $225 $250

Max Muller $325 $350 X X

Laura Levenberg X X $350 X

The rates requested for Mrs. Finfer and Mr. Muller are reasonable, and consistent 

with what has previously been awarded and shall therefore be awarded herein. Ms. 

Levenberg, however, was awarded the rate of $275 per hour for time billed in 2021, less 

than what is being requested herein. See Winkle v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., No. 

20-0485V. Accordingly, I reduce Ms. Levenberg’s rate to $275 per hour for time billed in

2021, consistent with what has been previously awarded. This results in a reduction of 

$7.50.

3

ATTORNEY COSTS

Petitioner requests $518.23 in overall costs. (ECF No. 31 at 2). This amount is 

comprised of obtaining medical records, shipping costs and reports and the Court’s filing 

fee. I have reviewed all of the requested costs and find them to be reasonable and shall 

award them in full. 

CONCLUSION

The Vaccine Act permits an award of reasonable attorney’s fees and costs. Section

15(e). Accordingly, I hereby GRANT Petitioner’s Motion for attorney’s fees and costs. I 

award a total of $9,670.73 (representing $9,152.50 in fees and $518.23 in costs) as a 

lump sum in the form of a check jointly payable to Petitioner and Petitioner’s counsel. 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

3 This amount consists of ($350 - $275 = $75 x 0.10 hrs = $7.50).

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.
4

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Brian H. Corcoran

Brian H. Corcoran

Chief Special Master