VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_12-vv-00156
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_12-vv-00156
Petitioner: David Scuderi
Filed: 2014-07-15
Decided: 2014-08-05
Vaccine: 
Vaccination date: 
Condition: 
Outcome: compensated
Award amount USD: 32788

AI-assisted case summary:
David Scuderi filed a petition under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. The case progressed to a stipulation for compensation, which was adopted by the court. On June 3, 2014, Scuderi filed a motion for attorney's fees and costs. The parties later filed a stipulation of fact concerning these fees and costs, with the respondent not objecting to the requested amount of $32,788.00. This amount included petitioner's costs, such as $764.25 for medical records and a $2,000 expert retainer fee. Special Master Thomas L. Gowen found that the petition was brought in good faith with a reasonable basis, deeming an award for fees and costs appropriate under 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-15(b) and (e)(1). The court awarded a total of $32,788.00, comprising $30,023.75 in a lump sum payable jointly to David Scuderi and his attorney, Patricia Finn, for attorney's fees and costs, and $2,764.25 in a lump sum payable to David Scuderi for his personal litigation costs. The public decision does not describe the specific vaccine(s) administered, the date(s) of vaccination, the alleged condition, the clinical story, or any specific medical experts.

Theory of causation field:
The public text does not describe the theory of causation, the specific vaccine(s) or dates of vaccination, or the alleged injury. The case resulted in a stipulation for compensation and a subsequent award for attorneys' fees and costs. Special Master Thomas L. Gowen awarded a total of $32,788.00, consisting of $30,023.75 for attorney fees and costs payable jointly to petitioner David Scuderi and his counsel Patricia Finn, and $2,764.25 for Scuderi's personal litigation costs. The Special Master found the petition was brought in good faith with a reasonable basis. The public text does not name any medical experts or describe any specific medical mechanism.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_12-vv-00156-0
Date issued/filed: 2014-08-05
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 07/15/2014) regarding 49 DECISION Fees Stipulation/Proffer (Signed by Special Master Thomas L. Gowen.)(mpj) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:12-vv-00156-UNJ Document 53 Filed 08/05/14 Page 1 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 12-156V
Filed: July 15, 2014
(Not to be published)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
DAVID SCUDERI, *
*
Petitioner, *
v. * Stipulation; Attorneys’ Fees & Costs
*
SECRETARY OF HEALTH *
AND HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
Respondent. *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Patricia Finn, Esq., Patricia Finn Attorney, P.C., Piermont, NY for petitioner.
Melonie McCall, Esq., U.S. Dept. of Justice, Washington, DC for respondent.
ATTORNEYS’ FEES & COSTS DECISION1
Gowen, Special Master:
In this case under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program,2 I issued
a decision awarding compensation and adopting the parties’ stipulation filed on April 21,
2014. On June 3, 2014, petitioner filed a motion for attorney’s fees and costs, and on
June 19, 2014, respondent filed an unopposed motion for extension of time to file her
response to petitioner’s motion. On July 14, 2014, the parties’ filed a stipulation of fact
concerning attorneys’ fees and costs. The stipulation indicated that respondent does
not object to the amended amount of $32,788.00 that petitioner is requesting, which
includes petitioner’s costs. Petitioner also filed on July 14, 2014, a statement pursuant
to General Order #9 indicating that he incurred $764.25 for medical records and $2,000
for an expert retainer fee.
1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I intend
to post this decision on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, in accordance with the E-
Government Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-347, § 205, 116 Stat. 2899, 2913 (codified as amended at 44
U.S.C. § 3501 note (2006)). In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), a party has 14 days to identify and
move to delete medical or other information, that satisfies the criteria in 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-12(d)(4)(B).
Further, consistent with the rule requirement, a motion for redaction must include a proposed redacted
decision. If, upon review, I agree that the identified material fits within the requirements of that provision, I
will delete such material from public access.
2 The applicable statutory provisions defining the program are found at 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-10 et seq.
(2006).

Case 1:12-vv-00156-UNJ Document 53 Filed 08/05/14 Page 2 of 2
I find that this petition was brought in good faith and that there existed a
reasonable basis for the claim. Therefore, an award for fees and costs is appropriate,
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-15(b) and (e)(1). Further, the proposed amount seems
reasonable and appropriate. Accordingly, I hereby award the total $32,788.003 as
follows:
 a lump sum of $30,023.75 in the form of a check payable jointly to
petitioner, David Scuderi, and petitioner’s counsel of record, Patricia
Finn, Esq., for petitioner’s attorney fees and costs, and
 a lump sum of $2,764.25 in the form of a check payable to petitioner,
David Scuderi, for his personal litigation costs.
The clerk of the court shall enter judgment in accordance herewith.4
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/ Thomas L. Gowen
Thomas L. Gowen
Special Master
3 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, 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-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, HHS, 924
F.2d 1029 (Fed. Cir.1991).
4 Entry of judgment can be expedited by each party’s filing of a notice renouncing the right to seek review.
See Vaccine Rule 11(a).
2