Starita v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 23-2048V

LISA STARITA, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, v. Filed: August 11, 2025

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent.

Michael G. McLaren, Black McLaren Jones Ryland & Griffee, P.C., Memphis, TN, for Petitioner.

Alexis B. Babcock, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

DECISION ON ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS 1 On November 29, 2023, Lisa Starita 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 18, 2022. Petition, ECF No. 1. On January 24, 2025, I issued a decision awarding compensation to Petitioner based on the Respondent’s proffer. ECF No. 26.

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 $32,383.96 (representing $29,647.60 in fees plus $2,736.36 in costs). Motion for Attorney’s Fees, filed on April 23, 2025. ECF No. 33. Furthermore, Petitioner filed a signed statement representing that no personal out-of-pocket expenses were incurred. ECF No. 33-3.

Respondent reacted to the motion on April 24, 2025, reporting that he is satisfied the statutory requirements for an award of attorney’s fees and costs are met in this case.

Respondent also indicated, “this is a straightforward SIRVA case that was conceded by respondent on January 13, 2025, approximately five months after the case was activated out of Pre-Assignment Review. Petitioner’s counsel requested $1,817.41 in costs to travel from Memphis to New Orleans to meet with his client, in addition to billing for 17 hours to prepare for, travel to, and participate in the meeting. ECF 33-2 at 5, 35.” And deferring resolution of the amount to be awarded to my discretion. Respondent Respondent’s Response to Motion at 1-5, ECF No. 34. Petitioner filed a reply on April 24, 2025, indicating that her request is reasonable. ECF No. 35.

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. Furthermore, Petitioner has provided supporting documentation for all claimed costs. ECF No. 33-2. I find the total costs claimed for travel in this case and Attorney Webb’s time billed for work performed to prepare for, travel to, and participate in the meeting with Petitioner to be reasonable. Respondent offered no specific objection to the rates or amounts sought. I find the requested costs reasonable and hereby award them in full.

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 $32,383.96 (representing $29,647.60 in fees plus $2,736.36 in costs) to be paid through an ACH deposit to Petitioner’s counsel’s IOLTA account for prompt disbursement.

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.