The opinion
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 20-0674V
CHARLES RICHARDSON,
Chief Special Master Corcoran
Petitioner,
v. Filed: February 9, 2024
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES,
Respondent.
Leigh Finfer, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA, for Petitioner.
Mallori Browne Openchowski, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for
Respondent.
DECISION ON ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS1
On June 3, 2020, Charles Richardson 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 he suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine
administration (“SIRVA”) as a result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccine administered on
October 28, 2018. Petition at 1. On August 16, 2023, I issued a decision awarding
damages to Petitioner, following briefing by the parties. ECF No. 46.
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), 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, I
agree that the identified material fits within this definition, I 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 section references 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 $23,342.84 (representing $22,216.50 for fees and $1,126.34 for costs). Petitioner’s
Application for Attorneys’ Fees (“Motion”) filed Nov. 28, 2023, ECF No. 51. In accordance
with General Order No. 9, counsel for Petitioner represents that Petitioner incurred no
out-of-pocket expenses. Id. at 2.
Respondent reacted to the motion on November 29, 2023, indicating that he is
satisfied that the statutory requirements for an award of attorney’s fees and costs are met
in this case, but deferring resolution of the amount to be awarded to my discretion.
Respondent’s Response to Motion at 2-3, 3 n.2, ECF No. 52. Petitioner filed no reply.
I note this case required additional briefing regarding the issue of damages. See
Status Report, filed Sept. 29, 2022, ECF No. 39 (reporting an impasse in damages
discussions); Petitioner’s Brief in Support of Damages, filed Nov. 10, 2022, ECF No. 41;
Petitioner’s Reply Brief in Support of Damages, filed Jan. 5, 2023, ECF No. 43.
Petitioner’s counsel expended approximately 9.2 hours drafting the brief in support of
damages; and 6.3 hours drafting the reply brief, totaling 15.5 hours. ECF No. 51 at 13-
14. I find this amount of time to be reasonable and will award the attorney’s fees
requested. (And all time billed to the matter was also reasonably incurred.)
Furthermore, Petitioner has provided supporting documentation for all claimed
costs, ECF No. 51 at 17-30. And Respondent offered no specific objection to the rates or
amounts sought. I have reviewed the requested costs and find them to be reasonable.
The Vaccine Act permits an award of reasonable attorney’s fees and costs for
successful claimants. Section 15(e). I award a total of $23,342.84 (representing
$22,216.50 for fees and $1,126.34 for costs) as a lump sum in the form of a check
jointly payable to Petitioner and Petitioner’s counsel, Leigh Finfer. 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
3
Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties may expedite entry of judgment by filing a joint notice
renouncing their right to seek review.
2