The opinion
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 24-0541V
SARAH SCHARA,
Chief Special Master Corcoran
Petitioner, Filed: March 26, 2026
v.
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES,
Respondent.
Jonathan Joseph Svitak, Shannon Law Group, P.C., Woodridge, IL, for Petitioner.
Mallori Browne Openchowski, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for
Respondent.
DECISION ON ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS 1
On April 9, 2024, Sarah Schara 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 and/or a tetanus diphtheria acellular pertussis
(Tdap) vaccination on April 20, 2022. Petition, ECF No. 1. On January 14, 2026, I issued
1Because 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).
a decision awarding compensation to Petitioner based on the parties’ stipulation. ECF
No. 25.
Petitioner has now filed a motion for attorney’s fees and costs, requesting an award
of $22,606.56 (representing $21,691.00 in fees plus $915.56 in costs). Application for
Attorneys’ Fees and Costs (“Motion”) filed January 21, 2026, ECF No. 29. Furthermore,
counsel for Petitioner represents that no personal out-of-pocket expenses were incurred
by the Petitioner. ECF No. 29 at 2.
Respondent reacted to the motion on January 30, 2026, indicating that he is
satisfied the statutory requirements for an award of attorneys’ fees and costs are met in
this case but deferring resolution of the amount to be awarded to my discretion.
Respondents Response to Motion at ECF No. 30. Petitioner filed no reply thereafter.
I have reviewed the billing records submitted with Petitioner’s request. The rates
requested for work performed through 2025 are reasonable and consistent with our prior
determinations and will therefore be awarded herein. Petitioner has requested the hourly
rate of $495.00 for 2026 work performed by attorney Jonathan Svitak, representing a rate
increase of $45.00 from the previous year. Petitioner has also requested the hourly rate
of $228.00 for paralegal work performed in 2026. I find the proposed rate increases to be
reasonable and hereby award them herein. And all time billed to the matter was
reasonably incurred.
Furthermore, Petitioner has provided supporting documentation for all claimed
costs. ECF No. 29-4 at 1-8. 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. Petitioner is awarded attorneys’ fees and costs in the total
amount of $22,606.56 (representing $21,691.00 in fees plus $915.56 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
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
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Brian H. Corcoran
Brian H. Corcoran
Chief Special Master
3