United States Court of Federal Claims, 2025

Koonce v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Decided March 14, 2025 · Christian J. Moran

Opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS **********************

ERIK KOONCE, * * No. 21-1560V Petitioner, * Special Master Christian J. Moran * v. * * Filed: February 20, 2025 SECRETARY OF HEALTH *

AND HUMAN SERVICES, * *

Respondent. * **********************

Laura J. Levenberg, Muller Brazil, Dresher, PA, for petitioner; Sarah B. Rifkin, United States Dep’t of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

UNPUBLISHED DECISION AWARDING

ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS1

Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(e), petitioner has requested a total of $53,325.29 in attorneys’ fees and costs. The undersigned tentatively found that petitioner requested a reasonable amount and was entitled to the full amount requested. The undersigned allowed respondent an opportunity to comment. Respondent did not interpose any objections within the time permitted.

Petitioner’s attorney, attorney staff, and expert have requested hourly rates that are consistent with the rates previously awarded and/or reasonable. The number of hours is reasonable. Thus, the amount requested is reasonable.

Petitioner is awarded 53,325.29 to be paid through an ACH deposit to petitioner’s counsel’s IOLTA account for prompt disbursement.

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.

s/Christian J. Moran Christian J. Moran Special Master

1 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), the parties have 14 days to identify and move to redact medical or other information, the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. Any changes will appear in the document posted on the website. 2 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties may expedite entry of judgment by filing a joint notice renouncing their right to seek review.

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