Court Opinion

ID: 6104492
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-19 14:02:30.675959+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:53:44.621527
License: Public Domain

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
                                   OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
                                           No. 19-1053V
                                        (not to be published)

    KAREN YAECK,
                                                                Chief Special Master Corcoran
                          Petitioner,
    v.                                                          Filed: December 14, 2021

    SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND                                     Special Processing Unit                 (SPU);
    HUMAN SERVICES,                                             Attorney’s Fees and Costs

                         Respondent.

Paul R. Brazil, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA, for Petitioner.

Claudia Barnes Gangi, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

                       DECISION ON ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS 1

       On July 22, 2019, Karen Yaeck 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 she suffered a Table injury – Shoulder Injury
Related to Vaccine Administration – as a result of her October 13, 2017 influenza
vaccination. (Petition at 1). On September 23, 2021, a decision was issued awarding
compensation to Petitioner based on the parties’ stipulation. (ECF No. 30).

1
   Because this unpublished Decision contains a reasoned explanation f or the action in this case, I am
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 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.
2National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755. Hereinafter, for ease
of citation, all section ref erences to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. §
300aa (2012).
        Petitioner has now filed a motion for attorney’s fees and costs, dated November
18, 2021 (ECF No. 35), requesting a total award of $16,389.27 (representing $15,875.20
in fees and $514.07 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 December 2, 2021, stating he does not object to
the overall amount sought and that his “lack of objection to the amount sought in this case
should not be construed as an admission, concession, or waiver as to the hourly rates
requested, the number of hours billed, or the other litigation related costs”. (ECF No. 36).
Petitioner did not file a reply thereafter.

       I have reviewed the billing records submitted with Petitioner’s request. In my
experience, the request appears reasonable, and I find no cause to reduce the requested
hours or rates.

       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 $16,389.27 (representing $15,875.20 in fees and $514.07 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. 3

IT IS SO ORDERED.

                                                      s/Brian H. Corcoran
                                                      Brian H. Corcoran
                                                      Chief Special Master

3
  Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties may expedite entry of judgment by f iling a joint notice
renouncing their right to seek review.
                                                  2