Savage v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 22-1543V

JILL SAVAGE, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, v. Filed: May 6, 2024

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent.

Maximillian J. Muller, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA, for Petitioner.

Camille Michelle Collett, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

DECISION ON ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS 1 On October 18, 2022, Jill Savage 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 alleged that she suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration as a result of an influenza vaccine that was administered on October 16, 2021. Petition, ECF No. 1. On February 14, 2024, I issued a decision awarding compensation to Petitioner based on the Respondent’s proffer. ECF No. 28.

Because this Decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action taken in this case, it must be made publicly accessible and will be posted on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, and/or at https://www.govinfo.gov/app/collection/uscourts/national/cofc, in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2018) (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 inf ormation, 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 f rom 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 ref erences to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa (2018).

Petitioner has now filed a motion for attorney’s fees and costs, requesting an award of $12,786.48 (representing $11,847.20 in fees plus $939.28 in costs). Application for Fees and Costs (“Motion”) filed March 13, 2024, ECF No. 32. Furthermore, counsel for Petitioner represents that Petitioner incurred no personal out-of-pocket expenses. Id. at 2.

Respondent reacted to the motion on Mar. 18, 2024, reporting 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. Respondent’s Response to Motion at 2-3, ECF No. 34. Petitioner did not file a reply thereafter.

The rates requested for work performed through the end of 2023 are reasonable and consistent with prior determinations, and will therefore be adopted. Petitioner has also requested the hourly rate of $450 for work performed by attorney Maximillian Muller in 2024, representing a rate increase of $25; and the hourly rate of $165 for paralegal work performed by Katy Yoos in 2024. I find these hourly rates to be reasonable. And all time billed to the matter was also reasonably incurred. Furthermore, Petitioner has provided supporting documentation for all claimed costs. Motion at 12-21. Respondent offered no specific objection to the rates or amounts sought.

The Vaccine Act permits an award of reasonable attorney’s fees and costs for successful claimants. Section 15(e). Accordingly, I hereby GRANT Petitioner’s Motion for attorney’s fees and costs. I award a total of $12,786.48 (representing $11,847.20 in fees plus $939.28 in costs) as a lump sum in the form of a check jointly payable to Petitioner and Petitioner’s counsel, Maximillian J. Muller. In the absence of a timely- filed motion for review (see Appendix B to the Rules of the Court), the Clerk of Court shall enter judgment in accordance with this Decision. 3 IT IS SO ORDERED.

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

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.