United States Court of Federal Claims, 2021

Bachant v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Decided August 27, 2021 · Brian H. Corcoran

Opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 19-1841V

(not to be published)

ROBERT BACHANT,

Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner,

v. Filed: July 26, 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.

Mark Kim Hellie, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

DECISION ON ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS 1 On December 4, 2019, Robert Bachant (“Petitioner”) 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 he suffered a table injury of Guillain-Barre syndrome as a result of a December 22, 2016 influenza vaccination. (Petition at 1). On June 4, 2021, a decision was issued awarding compensation to Petitioner based on the Respondent’s proffer. (ECF No. 34).

Petitioner has now filed a motion for attorney’s fees and costs, dated June 28, 2021, (ECF No. 38), requesting a total award of $18,832.35 (representing $15,851.70 in fees and $2,980.65 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 did not file a response to Petitioner’s motion.

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). I award a total of $18,832.35 (representing $15,851.70 in fees and $2,980.65 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

1 Because this unpublished Decision contains a reasoned explanation f or the action in this case, I am required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in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. 2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755. Hereinafter, for ease of citation, all “§” ref erences to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa (2012). 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.

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