United States Court of Federal Claims, 2015

Gebreyes v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Decided February 2, 2015 · Brian H. Corcoran

Opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 13-083V

(Not to be published)

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

* KEBEDE GEBREYES, *

* Petitioner, * Filed: January 7, 2015

* v. * Decision; Attorneys’

* Fees & Costs SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND * HUMAN SERVICES, *

* Respondent. *

* ***************************** Ronald Craig Homer, Conway, Homer & Chin-Caplan, P.C., Boston, MA, for Petitioner. Linda Renzi, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS DECISION1

On January 31, 2013, Kebede Gebreyes filed a petition seeking compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.2 Thereafter, on August 26, 2014, the parties filed a stipulation settling the case and detailing the amount to be awarded to Petitioner. I subsequently issued a decision finding the parties’ stipulation to be reasonable and granting Petitioner an award as outlined in the stipulation.

On December 10, 2014, Petitioner filed a motion for attorneys’ fees and costs. The motion indicates that the attorneys’ fees in this case are $13,220.70, the attorneys’ costs are $1,196.98, and Petitioner’s cost are $350.00. Respondent’s counsel did not formally respond to the motion, but has since informed my chambers that this amount represents a sum to which Respondent does not object. In addition, and in compliance with General Order #9, Petitioner and Counsel filed a statement regarding costs accrued.

I approve the requested amount for attorneys’ fees and costs as reasonable. Accordingly, an award of $350.00 should be made in the form of a check payable to Petitioner, and an award of $14,417.68 should be made in the form of a check payable jointly to Petitioner and Petitioner’s counsel, Ronald Homer. 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 the parties’ stipulation.3

IT IS SO ORDERED.

/s/ Brian H. Corcoran

Brian H. Corcoran Special Master

1 Because this decision contains a reasoned explanation for my action in this case, it will be posted on the website of the United States Court of Federal Claims, in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-347, § 205, 116 Stat. 2899, 2913 (codified as amended at 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2006)). As provided by 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-12(d)(4)(B), however, the parties may object to the inclusion of certain kinds of confidential information. To do so, Vaccine Rule 18(b) provides that each party has 14 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 decision will be available to the public. Id. 2 The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program comprises Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755 (codified as amended, 42 U.S.C.A. ' 300aa-10 – 34 (2006)) [hereinafter “Vaccine Act” or “the Act”]. Individual sections references hereafter will be to ' 300aa of the Act. 3 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties may expedite entry of judgment by each filing (either jointly or separately) a notice renouncing their right to seek review.

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.