VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_13-vv-00485
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_13-vv-00485
Petitioner: BERNADINE RAMIRES
Filed: 2014-01-10
Decided: 2014-01-10
Vaccine: 
Vaccination date: 
Condition: 
Outcome: compensated
Award amount USD: 9200

AI-assisted case summary:
Bernadine Ramires filed a petition for compensation on January 10, 2014. This decision addresses only attorneys' fees and costs. The parties filed a stipulation of fact agreeing on an appropriate amount for these fees and costs. Petitioner submitted her request, and after respondent raised objections to certain items, petitioner amended her application to $9,200.00. Respondent did not object to this amount, and the Special Master found it to be reasonable. The court awarded $9,200.00 in attorneys' fees and costs, payable jointly to Bernadine Ramires and her attorneys. Judgment was to be entered unless a motion for review was filed.

Theory of causation field:
unclear

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_13-vv-00485-0
Date issued/filed: 2014-01-10
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION Signed by Special Master Laura D Millman. (tjk) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:13-vv-00485-UNJ Document 26 Filed 01/10/14 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 13-485V
Filed: January 10, 2014
Not for Publication
*************************************
BERNADINE RAMIRES, *
*
Petitioner, * Attorneys’ fees and costs decision based on
* stipulation of fact
v. *
*
SECRETARY OF HEALTH *
AND HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
Respondent. *
*
*************************************
Mark T. Sadaka, Englewood, NJ, for petitioner.
Darryl R. Wishard, Washington, DC, for respondent.
MILLMAN, Special Master
DECISION AWARDING ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS1
On January 10, 2014, the parties filed a stipulation of fact in which they agreed on an
appropriate amount for attorneys’ fees and costs in this case.
Petitioner submitted her request for attorneys’ fees and costs to respondent. In accordance
with the General Order #9 requirement, petitioner asserts that she did not incur any out-of-pocket
expenses in pursuit of her petition. During informal discussions, respondent raised objections to
certain items in petitioner’s application. Based on these objections, petitioner amends her
1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the special master’s action in this
case, the special master intends to post this unpublished decision on the United States Court of Federal
Claims’s website, in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-347, 116 Stat. 2899,
2913 (Dec. 17, 2002). Vaccine Rule 18(b) states that all decisions of the special masters will be made
available to the public unless they contain trade secrets or commercial or financial information that is
privileged and confidential, or medical or similar information whose disclosure would constitute a clearly
unwarranted invasion of privacy. When such a decision is filed, petitioner has 14 days to identify and
move to redact such information prior to the document=s disclosure. If the special master, upon review,
agrees that the identified material fits within the banned categories listed above, the special master shall
redact such material from public access.

Case 1:13-vv-00485-UNJ Document 26 Filed 01/10/14 Page 2 of 2
application for attorneys’ fees and costs to $9,200.00. Respondent does not object to this amount.
The undersigned finds this amount to be reasonable. Accordingly, the court awards $9,200.00,
representing reimbursement for attorneys’ fees and costs. The award shall be in the form of a
check made payable jointly to petitioner and Law Offices of Sadaka Associates L.L.C. in the
amount of $9,200.00.
In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the clerk of the
court is directed to enter judgment herewith.2
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: January 10, 2014 s/ Laura D. Millman
Laura D. Millman
Special Master
2 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment can be expedited by each party, either separately or
jointly, filing a notice renouncing the right to seek review.
2