         In the United States Court of Federal Claims
                                 OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
                                         No. 16-0250V
                                     Filed: August 7, 2017
                                        UNPUBLISHED


    CAROLYN LANIER,
                                                             Special Processing Unit (SPU);
                        Petitioner,                          Attorneys’ Fees and Costs
    v.

    SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND
    HUMAN SERVICES,

                       Respondent.


Paul R. Brazil, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA, for petitioner.
Darryl R. Wishard, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

                      DECISION ON ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS1

Dorsey, Chief Special Master:

       On February 22, 2016, Carolyn Lanier (“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 alleged that she suffered an injury
to her right shoulder as a result of a pneumococcal conjugate vaccine she received on
October 26, 2015. On March 31, 2017, the undersigned issued a decision dismissing
the petition. (ECF No. 23.)




1
  Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the
undersigned intends 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). 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, the undersigned agrees that the identified material fits
within this definition, the undersigned 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 “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. §
300aa (2012).
        On June 27, 2017, petitioner filed a motion for attorneys’ fees and costs. (ECF
No. 25.)3 Petitioner requests attorneys’ fees in the amount of $2,700.00, and attorneys’
costs in the amount of $0.00. (Id. at 2.) In accordance with General Order #9,
petitioner's counsel represents that petitioner $400.00 in out-of-pocket expenses. Thus,
the total amount requested is $3,100.00 (see footnote 3 below).

        On June 27, 2017, respondent filed a response to petitioner’s motion. (ECF No.
26.) Respondent argues that “[n]either the Vaccine Act nor Vaccine Rule 13
contemplates any role for respondent in the resolution of a request by a petitioner for an
award of attorneys’ fees and costs.” Id. at 1. Respondent adds, however, that he “is
satisfied the statutory requirements for an award of attorneys’ fees and costs are met in
this case.” Id. at 2. Respondent “respectfully recommends that the Chief Special
Master exercise her discretion and determine a reasonable award for attorneys’ fees
and costs.” Id. at 3.

      The undersigned has reviewed the billing records submitted with petitioner’s
request. In the undersigned’s experience, the request appears reasonable, and the
undersigned finds no cause to reduce the requested hours or rates.

      The Vaccine Act permits an award of reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs.
§ 15(e). Based on the reasonableness of petitioner’s request, the undersigned
GRANTS petitioner’s motion for attorneys’ fees and costs.

        Accordingly, the undersigned awards the total of $3,100.00,4 as follows:

                A lump sum of $2,700.00, representing reimbursement for attorneys’
                 fees and costs, in the form of a check payable jointly to petitioner
                 and petitioner’s counsel, Muller Brazil, LLP; and

                A lump sum of $400.00, representing reimbursement for petitioner’s
                 costs, in the form of a check payable to petitioner.

        The clerk of the court shall enter judgment in accordance herewith.5



3
 A Motion to Amend the application for attorneys’ fees was filed on August 7, 2017. This revised
application included a request for $400.00 for filing costs that Ms. Lanier personally incurred.
4
  This amount is intended to cover all legal expenses incurred in this matter. This award encompasses all
charges by the attorney against a client, “advanced costs” as well as fees for legal services rendered.
Furthermore, § 15(e)(3) prevents an attorney from charging or collecting fees (including costs) that would
be in addition to the amount awarded herein. See generally Beck v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs.,
924 F.2d 1029 (Fed. Cir.1991).
5
  Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment can be expedited by the parties’ joint filing of notice
renouncing the right to seek review.
                                                     2
IT IS SO ORDERED.

                        s/Nora Beth Dorsey
                        Nora Beth Dorsey
                        Chief Special Master




                    3
