        In the United States Court of Federal Claims
                                 OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
                                         No. 15-1129V
                                    Filed: October 20, 2016
                                        UNPUBLISHED
*********************************
JAMIE SARACINO,                                   *
                                                  *
                         Petitioner,              *
v.                                                *
                                                  *        Attorneys’ Fees and Costs;
SECRETARY OF HEALTH                               *        Special Processing Unit (“SPU”)
AND HUMAN SERVICES,                               *
                                                  *
                         Respondent.              *
                                                  *
****************************
Franklin John Caldwell, Jr., Maglio, Christopher & Toale, PA, Sarasota, FL, for
petitioner.
Voris Edward Johnson, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.


                      DECISION ON ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS 1

Dorsey, Chief Special Master:

      On October 6, 2015, 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 alleges that the influenza vaccination that she received on
November 25, 2014 caused her to suffer a shoulder injury. On April 28, 2016, the
undersigned issued a decision awarding compensation to petitioner based on
respondent’s proffer. (ECF No. 21).




1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the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.

2National 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 September 19, 2016, petitioner filed a motion for attorneys’ fees and costs.
(ECF No. 27). Petitioner requests attorneys’ fees in the amount of $16,605.10 and
attorneys’ costs in the amount of $1,919.22 for a total amount of $18,524.32. Id. at 1-2.
In accordance with General Order #9, petitioner’s counsel represents that petitioner
incurred no out-of-pocket expenses.

        On September 21, 2016, respondent filed a response to petitioner’s motion.
(ECF No. 28). 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 she “is
satisfied the statutory requirements for an award of attorneys’ fees and costs are met in
this case.” Id. at 2. Additionally, she “asserts that a reasonable amount for fees and
costs in the present case would fall between $12,000.00 to $14,000.00” but provides no
basis or explanation for how she arrived at this proposed range. Id. at 3.

       On September 28, 2016, petitioner filed a reply. (ECF No. 29). Petitioner
disputes the validity of respondent’s proposed fee range and contends that petitioner
has sufficiently substantiated the fee request. Id.

       On October 18, 2016, petitioner filed a Notice of Supplemental Authority alerting
the undersigned to Special Master Corcoran’s issuance of the October 14, 2016,
decision in Dezern v. Sec’y of HHS, No. 13-643V, wherein the special master awarded
attorneys’ fees to petitioner’s counsel at forum rates. (ECF No. 30.)

      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 $18,524.32 3 as a lump
sum in the form of a check jointly payable to petitioner and petitioner’s counsel F.
John Caldwell, Jr. 4


3This 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).
4
 Petitioner requests that the check be forwarded to Maglio Christopher & Toale, PA, 1605 Main Street,
Suite 710, Sarasota, FL, 34236.

                                                    2
        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




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.
                                                     3
