United States Court of Federal Claims, 2017

Orgel-Olson v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Decided April 18, 2017 · Laura D Millman

Opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 15-285V Filed: March 24, 2017 Not for Publication

************************************* SHAWN ORGEL-OLSON, *

Petitioner, *

* Interim attorneys’ fees and costs v. * decision

SECRETARY OF HEALTH * AND HUMAN SERVICES, *

Respondent. *

************************************* Renee J. Gentry, Washington, DC, for petitioner.

Ryan D. Pyles, Washington, DC, for respondent.

MILLMAN, Special Master

DECISION AWARDING INTERIM ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS 1 On February 22, 2017, petitioner filed a supplemental application for interim attorneys’ fees and costs for the work done by his previous attorney, Mr. Homer, before he withdrew from the case. Petitioner requests $4,216.00 in interim attorneys’ fees and $53.06 in interim attorneys’ costs, for a total request of $4,269.06. Respondent’s response to petitioner’s motion was due by March 13, 2017, but respondent has not filed a response. Therefore, this matter is now ripe for adjudication.

This is petitioner’s second motion for interim attorneys’ fees and costs. On November 17, 2016, the undersigned granted petitioner’s October 12, 2016 motion for interim attorneys’ fees and costs and awarded petitioner $37,231.02. On November 29, 2016, the parties filed a joint notice not to seek review of the undersigned’s November 17, 2016 decision.

Based on her experience and review of the billing records submitted by petitioner, the undersigned finds that petitioner’s interim attorneys’ fees and costs request is reasonable. Accordingly, the undersigned awards $4,269.06, representing interim attorneys’ fees and costs. The award shall be in the form of a check made payable jointly to petitioner and the Vaccine Injury Clinic, George Washington University School of Law in the amount of $4,269.06.

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. 2 IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 24, 2017 s/ Laura D. Millman

Laura D. Millman Special Master

1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the special master’s action in this case, the special master intends to post this unpublished decision on the United States Court of Federal Claims’ website, in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002, 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal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). 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, petitioner has 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. 2 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.

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