         In the United States Court of Federal Claims
                                 OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
                                         No. 16-1111V
                                     Filed: August 4, 2017
                                        UNPUBLISHED


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

    SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND
    HUMAN SERVICES,

                       Respondent.


Edward M. Kraus, Law Offices of Chicago Kent, Chicago, IL, for petitioner.
Lynn Elizabeth Ricciardella, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for
respondent.

                      DECISION ON ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS1

Dorsey, Chief Special Master:

       On September 7, 2016, 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 a shoulder injury related to vaccine
administration following an influenza vaccination on November 2, 2013. On May 12,
2017, the undersigned issued a decision awarding compensation to petitioner based on
respondent’s proffer. (ECF No. 30.)




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  Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the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 July 24, 2017, petitioner filed an unopposed motion for attorneys’ fees and
costs. (ECF No. 34.)3 Petitioner requests attorneys’ fees in the amount of $10,614.90
and attorneys’ costs in the amount of $461.75. (Id. at 1.) In accordance with General
Order #9, petitioner's counsel represents that petitioner incurred no out-of-pocket
expenses.

      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 and the lack of opposition
from respondent, the undersigned GRANTS petitioner’s motion for attorneys’ fees and
costs.

      Accordingly, the undersigned awards the total of $11,076.654 as a lump
sum in the form of a check jointly payable to petitioner and petitioner’s counsel
Edward Kraus.

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

IT IS SO ORDERED.

                                                          s/Nora Beth Dorsey
                                                          Nora Beth Dorsey
                                                          Chief Special Master




3
    The motion was filed as an unopposed motion.
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
