VICP Registry Case Source Bundle Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_19-vv-01455 Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_19-vv-01455 Petitioner: L.C. Filed: 2019-09-23 Decided: 2024-03-25 Vaccine: MMR Vaccination date: 2018-04-18 Condition: acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (ADEM) Outcome: compensated Award amount USD: 721446.77 AI-assisted case summary: On September 23, 2019, Sabrina and Wayne Compton filed a petition on behalf of their minor child, L.C., alleging that L.C. suffered injuries from the Measles, Mumps, Rubella (MMR) and Varicella vaccines administered on April 18, 2018. Petitioners alleged that L.C. experienced symptoms including full body urticaria, gait imbalance, left-sided weakness, and brain MRI findings consistent with acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (ADEM). The respondent denied that the vaccines caused L.C.'s condition. The parties reached a joint stipulation for damages, which Special Master Daniel T. Horner adopted. The initial award, entered on April 14, 2023, included a lump sum of $683,147.35 for life care expenses, partial lost future earnings, and pain and suffering; $5,000.00 for past unreimbursable expenses; and $33,299.43 to reimburse a Florida Medicaid lien. The stipulation also detailed a complex annuity for future expenses, including various medical, therapy, and equipment costs, with payments increasing at a rate of three percent compounded annually. On March 25, 2024, Special Master Horner granted a motion to amend the judgment to correct an overpayment of the Florida Medicaid lien. This correction resulted in an additional award of $24,319.12, to be returned to the Department of Health and Human Services. The total compensation awarded, accounting for this correction, was $721,446.77. Petitioners were represented by Diana Stadelnikas of Maglio Christopher and Toale, PA. Respondent was represented by Christine Becer and later Lara A. Englund of the U.S. Department of Justice. Theory of causation field: Petitioners alleged that the Measles, Mumps, Rubella (MMR) and Varicella vaccines administered on April 18, 2018, caused L.C. to suffer from acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (ADEM), with symptoms including urticaria, gait imbalance, left-sided weakness, and brain MRI findings. The respondent denied causation. The parties reached a joint stipulation for damages, which was adopted by Special Master Daniel T. Horner. The stipulation did not detail a specific medical mechanism or name expert witnesses, but it acknowledged the "Table" as a basis for the vaccines. The initial award was entered on April 14, 2023, with a total of $721,446.77 awarded after a subsequent amendment on March 25, 2024, to correct a Medicaid lien overpayment. Petitioners were represented by Diana Stadelnikas, and respondent by Christine Becer and Lara A. Englund. Public staged source text: ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_19-vv-01455-0 Date issued/filed: 2023-04-07 Pages: 14 Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 3/13/2023) regarding 60 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer. Signed by Special Master Daniel T. Horner. (amb) Service on parties made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:19-vv-01455-UNJ Document 61 Filed 04/07/23 Page 1 of 14 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 19-1455V Filed: March 13, 2023 UNPUBLISHED SABRINA COMPTON, and WAYNE COMPTON on behalf of L.C., a minor child, Joint Stipulation on Damages; Measles, Mumps, Rubella (“MMR”) Petitioners, vaccine; Varicella vaccine; Acute v. disseminated encephalomyelitis (“ADEM”). SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Diana Stadelnikas, Maglio Christopher and Toale, PA, Sarasota, FL, for petitioner. Christine Becer, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent. DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1 On September 23, 2019, petitioners filed a petition for compensation on behalf of their minor child, L.C., under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq.,2 (the “Vaccine Act”). Petitioners allege that L.C. suffered symptoms including full body urticaria, gait imbalance, left sided weakness and brain MRI studies positive for white matter patches that were subsequently diagnosed as Acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (“ADEM”). (Petition at 2-3; Stipulation, filed March 13, 2023, at ¶ 4.) Petitioners further allege that L.C. has experienced the residual effects of his condition for more than six months, that there has been no prior award or settlement of a civil action for damages as a result of his condition, and that his vaccine was administered in the United States. (Petition at 4; Stipulation at ¶¶ 3-5.) “Respondent denies that the vaccines caused L.C. to suffer from ADEM or any other injury. ” (Stipulation at ¶ 6.) 1 Because this decision contains a reasoned explanation for the special master’s action in this case, it will be posted on the United States Court of Federal Claims’ website in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002. See 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (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 the special master, upon review, agrees that the identified material fits within this definition, it will be redacted 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 “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa (2012). Case 1:19-vv-01455-UNJ Document 61 Filed 04/07/23 Page 2 of 14 Nevertheless, on March 13, 2023, the parties filed the attached joint stipulation, stating that a decision should be entered awarding compensation. I find the stipulation reasonable and adopt it as the decision of the Court in awarding damages, on the terms set forth therein. Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Stipulation, I award the following compensation: • A lump sum of $683,147.35, which amount represents compensation for first year life care expenses ($117,971.05), partial lost future earnings ($365,176.30), and pain and suffering ($200,000.00), in the form of a check payable to petitioners as guardian(s)/conservator(s) of the estate of L.C. for the benefit of L.C. No payments shall be made until petitioners provide respondent with documentation establishing that they have been appointed as guardian(s)/conservator(s) of L.C. 's estate; • A lump sum of $5,000.00, which amount represents compensation for past unreimbursable expenses, in the form of a check payable to petitioners, Sabrina Compton and Wayne Compton; • A lump sum of $33,299.43, which amount represents reimbursement of a Florida Medicaid lien for services rendered on behalf of L.C., in the form of a check payable jointly to petitioners and; Equian PO Box 182643 Columbus, OH 43218 Equian Event #: 45760264 Legacy Case #: 1049854 Att: Ricoya Dismukes Petitioners agree to endorse this check to Equian. • An amount sufficient to purchase the annuity contract described in the attached Stipulation at paragraph 10, paid to the life insurance company from which the annuity will be purchased (the "Life Insurance Company"). These amounts represent compensation for all items of damages that would be available under § 15(a). (Stipulation, at ¶ 8.) In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the clerk of the court is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this decision.3 3 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. 2 Case 1:19-vv-01455-UNJ Document 61 Filed 04/07/23 Page 3 of 14 IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Daniel T. Horner Daniel T. Horner Special Master 3 Case 1:19-vv-01455-UNJ Document 61 Filed 04/07/23 Page 4 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS SABRINA COMPTON and ) WAYNE COMPTON on behalf of ) L.C., a minor child, ) ) Petitioners, ) No. 19-l 455V V. ) Special Master Horner ) ECF SECRETA RY OF HEAL TH AND HUMAN ) SERVICES, ) ) Respondent. ) STIPULATION The parties hereby stipulate to the following matters: 1. On behalf of their son, L.C .. petitioners filed a petition for vaccine compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10 to 34 (the "Vaccine Program''). The petition seeks compensation for injuries allegedly related to L.C. 's receipt of the measles, mumps, and rubella ("MMR"), varicella, and influenza ("flu") vaccines, which vaccines are contained in the Vaccine Injury Table (the "Table"), 42 C.F.R. § 100.3 (a). 2. L.C. received his immunizations on April 18, 2018. 3. The vaccines were administered within the United States. 4. Petitioners allege that the vaccines caused L.C. to suffer from acute disseminated encephalomyelitis ("ADEM"), and that L.C. experienced residual effects of this injury for more than six months. 5. Petitioners represent that there has been no prior award or settlement of a civil action for damages on behalf of L.C. as a result of his condition. Case 1:19-vv-01455-UNJ Document 61 Filed 04/07/23 Page 5 of 14 6. Respondent denies that the vaccines caused L.C. to suffer from ADEM or any other mJury. 7. Maintaining their above-stated positions, the parties nevertheless now agree that the issues between them shall be settled and that a decision should be entered awarding the compensation described in paragraph 8 of this Stipulation. 8. As soon as practicable after an entry of judgment reflecting a decision consistent with the terms of this Stipulation, and after petitioner has filed an election to receive compensation pursuant to 42 U .S.C. § 300aa-21 (a)( 1) , the Secretary of Health and Human Services will issue the following vaccine compensation payments: a. A lump sum of $683,147.35, which amount represents compensation for first year life care expenses ($117,971.05), partial lost future earnings ($365,176.30), and pain and suffering ($200,000.00), in the form of a check payable to petitioners as guardian(s)/conservator(s) of the estate of L.C. for the benefit of L.C. No payments shall be made until petitioners provide respondent with documentation establishing that they have been appointed as guardian(s)/conservator(s) of L.C. 's estate: b. A lump sum of $5,000.00, which amount represents compensation for past unreimbursable expenses, in the form of a check payable to petitioners, Sabrina Compton and Wayne Compton: c. A lump sum of $33,299.43, which amount represents reimbursement of a Florida Medicaid lien for services rendered on behalf of L.C., in the form of a check payable jointly to petitioners and Equian PO Box 182643 Columbus, OH 43218 Equian Event#: 45760264 Legacy Case #: 1049854 Att: Ricoya Dismukes Petitioners agree to endorse this check to Equian. d. An amount sufficient to purchase the annuity contract described in paragraph 10 belmv, paid to the life insurance company from which the annuity will be purchased (the "Life Insurance Company"). 2 Case 1:19-vv-01455-UNJ Document 61 Filed 04/07/23 Page 6 of 14 These amounts represent compensation for all damages that would be available under 42 U.S.C. §300aa-15(a). 9. The Life Insurance Company must have a minimum of $250,000.000.00 capital and surplus, exclusive of any mandatory security valuation reserve. The Life Insurance Company must have one of the following ratings from two of the following rating organizations: a. A.M. Best Company: A++. A+. A+g. A+p. A+r, or A+s: b. Moody's Investor Service Claims Paying Rating: Aa3. Aa2, Aal, or Aaa: c. Standard and Poor's Corporation Insurer Claims-Paying Ability Rating: AA-. AA, AA+. or AAA: d. Fitch Credit Rating Company. Insurance Company Claims Paying Ability Rating: AA-, AA, AA+. or AAA. 10. The Secretary of Health and Human Services agrees to purchase an annuity contract from the Life Insurance Company for the benefit of LC., pursuant to which the Life Insurance Company will agree to make payments periodically to petitioners, as the court-appointed guardian(s)/conservator(s) of the estate of L.C. for the following items of compensation: a. For future unreimbursable Blue Cross Blue Shield Premium expenses. beginning on the first anniversary of the date of judgment, an annual amount of $5,852.16 to be paid up to the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2032. Then. beginning on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2032. an annual amount of $6372.36 to be paid up to the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2033. Then, beginning on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2033. an annual amount of $6,571.20 to be paid up to the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2034. Then. beginning on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2034. an annual amount of $6. 770.16 to be paid up to the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2035. Then, beginning on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2035, an annual amount of $6,984.36 to be paid up to the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2036. Then, beginning on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2036. an annual amount of $7.198.56 to be paid up to the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2037. Then, beginning on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2037. an annual amount of $7,420.44 to be paid up to the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2038. Then, beginning on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2038, an annual amount of$7,649.88 to be paid up to the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2041, ail amounts increasing at the rate of three percent (3%), compounded annually from the date of judgment. 3 Case 1:19-vv-01455-UNJ Document 61 Filed 04/07/23 Page 7 of 14 b. For future unreimbursable Blue Cross Blue Shield Maximum out of Pocket expenses, beginning on the first anniversary of the date of judgment, an annual amount of $5,500.00 to be paid up to the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2041. increasing at the rate of three percent (3%), compounded annually from the date of judgment. c. For future unreimbursable Medicare Part B Premium and Medigap expenses. beginning on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2041, an annual amount of $10. 771.20 to be paid up to the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2082. Thereafter, beginning on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2082. an annual amount of $4.591.20 to be paid for the remainder of L.C. 's life. all amounts increasing at the rate of three percent (3%), compounded annually from the date of judgment. d. For future unreimbursable Medicare Part B Deductible expenses. beginning on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2041, an annual amount of $233 .00 to be paid for the remainder of L.C. 's life, increasing at the rate of three percent (3%), compounded annually from the date of judgment. e. For future unreimbursable Pediatrician/Primary Care Physician Mileage. Pain Management and Rehab Mileage. Spasticity Clinic Mileage, Neurologist Mileage, Orthopedist Mileage. Soft Tissue Release Mileage, Hip Osteotomy Mileage. Neuropsychology Evaluation Mileage. and Counseling Mileage expenses, beginning on the first anniversary of the date of judgment, an amount of $151.01 to be paid up to the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2027. Then. on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2027. a lump sum of $301.31. Then. beginning on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2028, an annual amount of $224.93 to be paid up to the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2036. Then. beginning on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2036. an annual amount of $278.66 to be paid up to the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2039. Then. on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2039. a lump sum of $256.35. Then. on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2040. a lump sum of $182.43. Then, on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2041. a lump sum of $231. 71. Then. beginning on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2042. an annual amount of $182.43 to be paid up to the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2045. Then. on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2045. a lump sum of $231.71. Then. beginning on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2046, an annual amount of $182.43 to be paid up to the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2049. Then, on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2049. a lump sum of $231.71. Then, beginning on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2050. an annual amount of $182.43 to be paid up to the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2053. Then, on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2053. a lump sum of $231. 71. Then, beginning on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2054, an annual amount of $182.43 to be paid up to the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2057. Then. on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2057. a lump sum of $231. 71. Then. beginning on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 205 8, an annual amount of $182.43 to be paid up to the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2061. Then, on the anniversary of the date of 4 Case 1:19-vv-01455-UNJ Document 61 Filed 04/07/23 Page 8 of 14 judgment in year 2061, a lump sum of $231.71. Thereafter, beginning on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2062, an annual amount of $182.43 to be paid for the remainder of L.C.'s life, all amounts increasing at the rate of three percent (3%), compounded annually from the date ofj udgment. f. For future unreimbursable Care Management and Baclofen expenses, beginning on the first anniversary of the date of judgment, an annual amount of $2,520.00 to be paid up to the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2035. Then, beginning on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2035, an annual amount of$5,040.00 to be paid up to the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2040. Then, beginning on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2040, an annual amount of$3,780.00 to be paid up to the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2041. Then, beginning on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 204 l, an annual amount of $4. I 23. l O to be paid up to the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2077. Thereafter, beginning on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2077, an annual amount of $5,383.10 to be paid for the remainder of L.C.'s life, all amounts increasing at the rate of three percent (3%), compounded annually from the date of judgment. g. For future unreimbursable Power Scooter, Scooter Battery, and Scooter Carrier expenses, on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2032, a lump sum of $4,042.00. Thereafter. beginning on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2033, an annual amount of $728.82 to be paid for the remainder of L.C. 's life, all amounts increasing at the rate of three percent (3%), compounded annually from the date of judgment. h. For future unreimbursable Transfer Chair. Bedside Commode, and Home Occupational Therapy Assessment expenses, on the first anniversary of the date of judgment a lump sum of $245.83. Then, beginning on the second anniversary of the date of judgment an annual amount of $94.56 to be paid up to the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2053. Thereafter, beginning on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2053, an annual amount of $73.81 to be paid for the remainder of L.C.'s life, all amounts increasing at the rate of three percent (3%), compounded annually from the date of judgment. i. For future unreimbursable Physical Therapy Evaluation Mileage, Occupational Therapy Evaluation Mileage, Physical Therapy Mileage, Occupational Therapy Mileage. Speech Therapy Evaluation Mileage, Speech Therapy Mileage, and Seating Clinic Mileage expenses. beginning on the first anniversary of the date of judgment, an annual amount of $2.458.76 to be paid up to the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2033. Then, beginning on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2033, an annual amount of $2.45 I .24 to be paid up to the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2038. Then, beginning on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2038. an annual amount of $862.10 to be paid up to the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2058. Thereafter, beginning on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2058, an annual amount of $301.05 to be paid for the remainder of L.C. 's life, all amounts 5 Case 1:19-vv-01455-UNJ Document 61 Filed 04/07/23 Page 9 of 14 increasing at the rate of three percent (3%), compounded annually from the date of judgment. j. For future unreimbursable Physical Therapy, Occupational Therapy, Occupational Therapy at Home, and Speech Therapy expenses, beginning on the first anniversary of the date of judgment an annual amount of $21,150.00 to be paid up to the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 203 8. Then, beginning on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2038, an annual amount of$5,l 15.00 to be paid up to the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2041, all amounts increasing at the rate of three percent (3%), compounded annually from the date ofjudgment. k. For future unreimbursable Speech Therapy Evaluation expenses, beginning on the first anniversary of the date of judgment an annual amount of $520.00 to be paid up to the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2038, increasing at the rate of three percent (3%). compounded annually from the date of judgment. I. For future unreimbursable Seating Clinic expenses, beginning on the first anniversary of the date of judgment an annual amount of $240.00 to be paid up to the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2033. Then, beginning on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2033, an annual amount of $96.00 to be paid up to the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2038, all amounts increasing at the rate of three percent (3%), compounded annually from the date of judgment. m. For future unreimbursable Gym Membership and Mileage for Gym expenses. beginning on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2038, an annual amount of $1,427.35 to be paid up to the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2039. Then. beginning on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2039, an annual amount of $1,392.95 to be paid up to the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2082. all amounts increasing at the rate of three percent (3%), compounded annually from the date of judgment. n. For future unreimbursable Driver Evaluation expenses. on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2033, a lump sum of $5,825.00, increasing at the rate of three percent (3%). compounded annually from the date of judgment. o. For future unreimbursable Personal Care Attendant and Personal Care Attendant Post Surgery/Respite expenses, beginning on the first anniversary of the date of judgment an annual amount of $15,899.52 to be paid up to the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2027. Then. beginning on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2027, an annual amount of $23,033.92 to be paid up to the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2028. Then. beginning on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2028, an annual amount of $15.899 .52 to be paid up to the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2035. Then. beginning on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2035. an annual amount of $43.800.00 to be paid up to the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2082. Thereafter, beginning on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2082, an annual amount of $70,080.00 to be paid for the remainder of L.C. 's life. all 6 Case 1:19-vv-01455-UNJ Document 61 Filed 04/07/23 Page 10 of 14 amounts increasing at the rate of three percent (3%), compounded annually from the date of judgment. p. For future unreimbursable Cleaning Service expenses, beginning on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2040. an annual amount of $1.200.00 to be paid for the remainder ofL.C.'s life, increasing at the rate of three percent (3%). compounded annually from the date of judgment. q. For future unreimbursable Home Modification expenses. on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2040, a lump sum of $50,000.00. Then, on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2060, a lump sum of $50,000.00, all amounts increasing at the rate of three percent (3%), compounded annually from the date of judgment. r. For future unreimbursable Auto Hand Control & Evo Seat expenses, on the anniversary of the date of judgment in year 2033. a lump sum of$15.500.00. Thereafter, beginning on the anniversary of the date ofj udgment in year 2034. an annual amount of $1.550.00 to be paid for the remainder of L.C. 's life, all amounts increasing at the rate of three percent (3%), compounded annually from the date of judgment. At the sole discretion of the Secretary of Health and Human Services. the periodic payments may be provided to the petitioner in monthly. quarterly. annual, or other installments. The "annual amounts" set forth above describe only the total yearly sum to be paid to the petitioner and do not require that the payment be made in one annual installment. The petitioner will continue to receive the annuity payments from the Life Insurance Company only so long as L.C. is alive at the time that a particular payment is due. Written notice to the Secretary of Health and Human Services. and the Life Insurance Company shall be provided within twenty (20) days of L.C.'s death. 11. The annuity contract will be ovmed solely and exclusively by the Secretary of Health and Human Services and will be purchased as soon as practicable following the entry of a judgment in conformity with this Stipulation. The parties stipulate and agree that the Secretary of Health and Human Services and the United States of America are not responsible for the payment of any sums other than the amounts set forth in paragraph 8 herein and the amounts awarded pursuant to paragraph 12 herein, and that they do not guarantee or insure any of the 7 Case 1:19-vv-01455-UNJ Document 61 Filed 04/07/23 Page 11 of 14 future annuity payments. Upon the purchase of the annuity contract, the Secretary of Health and Human Services and the United States of America are released from any and all obligations with respect to future annuity payments. 12. As soon as practicable after the entry of judgment on entitlement in this case. and after petitioners have filed both a proper and timely election to receive compensation pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-2l(a)(l), and an application, the parties will submit to further proceedings before the special master to award reasonable attorneys' fees and costs incurred in proceeding upon this petition. 13. Petitioners and their attorney represent that compensation to be provided pursuant to this Stipulation is not for any items or services for which the Program is not primarily liable under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-l 5(g), to the extent that payment has been made or can reasonably be expected to be made under any State compensation programs, insurance policies. Federal or State health benefits programs ( other than Title XIX of the Social Security Act (4 2 U .S.C. § 1396 et seq.)). or by entities that provide health services on a pre-paid basis. 14. Payments made pursuant to paragraph 8 and any amounts awarded pursuant to paragraph 12 of this Stipulation will be made in accordance with 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(i), subject to the availability of sufficient statutory funds. 15. The parties and their attorneys further agree and stipulate that, except for any award for attorneys' fees and litigation costs, and past unreimbursable expenses, the money provided pursuant to this Stipulation \viii be used solely for the benefit of L.C. as contemplated by a strict construction of 42 U.S.C. §300aa-I 5(a) and (d), and subject to the conditions of 42 U .S.C. § 300aa-15(g) and (h). 16. Petitioners represent that they presently are. or within 90 days of the date of 8 Case 1:19-vv-01455-UNJ Document 61 Filed 04/07/23 Page 12 of 14 judgment will become, duly authorized to serve as guardian(s)/conservator(s) of L.C.'s estate under the laws of the State of Florida. No payments pursuant to this Stipulation shall be made until petitioners provide the Secretary with documentation establishing their appointment as guardian(s)/conservator(s) of L.C.'s estate. If petitioners are not authorized by a court of competent jurisdiction to serve as guardian(s)/conservator(s) of the estate of L.C. at the time a payment pursuant to this Stipulation is to be made, any such payment shall be paid to the party or parties appointed by a court of competent jurisdiction to serve as guardian(s )/conservator(s) of the estate of L.C. upon submission of written documentation of such appointment to the Secretary. 17. In return for the payments described in paragraphs 8 and 12. petitioners, in their individual capacities and as legal representatives of L.C., on behalf of themselves. L.C.. and his heirs. executors, administrators. successors or assigns, do forever irrevocably and unconditionally release. acquit and discharge the United States and the Secretary of Health and Human Services from any and all actions or causes of action (including agreements, judgments. claims, damages. loss of services. expenses and all demands of whatever kind or nature) that have been brought. could have been brought. or could be timely brought in the Court of Federal Claims. under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. 42 U.S.C. § 300 aa-10 et seq .. on account of. or in any way growing out of: any and all known or unknown. suspected or unsuspected personal injuries to or death of L.C. resulting from. or alleged to have resulted from, the vaccinations administered on April 18, 2018, as alleged by petitioners in a petition for vaccine compensation filed on or about September 23. 2019, in the United States Court of Federal Claims as petition No. l 9-1455V. 18. If L.C. should die prior to entry of judgment this agreement shall be voidable upon 9 Case 1:19-vv-01455-UNJ Document 61 Filed 04/07/23 Page 13 of 14 proper notice to the Court on behalf of either or both of the parties. 19. If the special master fails to issue a decision in complete conformity with the terms of this Stipulation or if the Court of Federal Claims fails to enter judgment in conformity with a decision that is in complete conformity with the terms of this Stipulation. then the parties' settlement and this Stipulation shall be voidable at the sole discretion of either party. 20. This Stipulation expresses a full and complete negotiated settlement of liability and damages claimed under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, as amended. except as otherwise noted in paragraph 12 above. There is absolutely no agreement on the part of the parties hereto to make any payment or to do any act or thing other than is herein expressly stated and clearly agreed to. The parties further agree and understand that the award described in this Stipulation may reflect a compromise of the parties' respective positions as to liability and/or amount of damages. and further. that a change in the nature of the injury or condition or in the items of compensation sought. is not grounds to modify or revise this agreement. 21. Petitioners hereby authorize respondent to disclose documents filed by petitioners in this case consistent with the Privacy Act and the routine uses described in the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program System of Records. No. 09-15-0056. 22. This Stipulation shall not be construed as an admission by the United States or the Secretary of Health and Human Services that the MMR. varicella, or flu vaccines caused L.C. to suffer ADEM or any other injury or condition. 23. All rights and obligations of petitioners hereunder shall apply equally to petitioners· heirs. executors. administrators. successors. and/or assigns as legal representatives of L.C. END OF STIPULATION Case 1:19-vv-01455-UNJ Document 61 Filed 04/07/23 Page 14 of 14 PETITl<)\F.R: \II Olf'\t·.Y (H IH CORD FOR \llTIIORIZED R[PRSEXl.\Tl\·t-: OF TIIF .\TTORl'EY GE~ERAI.: ~~w~ . AS. L:~(). HL/\IHl·R I.. Pl ,\l'I \1.\\. \b~·litl Chn,1oplwr & Til;tk. P \ Dcput\ Dirt·ctn1 111()'.' \lain ~lrL'L'l. Suit,: 7 1o rurt:-. lfr:1nch :--- lt"\S1)!;l. I· ( ,..i2 ;/) Civil f1I\ 1,1011 ()r ·1d : ~:-.~X) ll:i2-~2--+2 U.S. Dcpartl111..'lll lusticc I 111:iil: dstalklnik:i-;•a mctLm ,c,, ,:u1n P.O. Bo, 1-.1.(, 8enjam111 l-rankl1n :Station \Vash111g1~,n. IX 2(Hl-+-t-O1 -lh ,\l J'IIORll'.LD RLl'RLSl·.'J I/\ l'I\ I .i\TTORI\L Y 01 Rl l'Ol{l) I OR (lF Tl IL SI CRl·T!-\RY OF HF \I Tll R l:SPOf\1)1· ~ f .\\D llli!\1.-\N SI .. R\.'ICI ~ :: · 111, • h·t 1~ • ,._ -.. Gcorqo R (~rinw~ C, I :1 ~ CDR CFC>RCiF RITD GRll'vll c.;_ MD. v1PII CllRISTll'\f- f\1. HI-CTR Dm.:ct1..lr, 1.)1, l!-.1011 ld. lnJlll> I nal ..\t10111L'y ( nmpcns:Hl(lll l'ro1-!r:1m:-. lort:-. Branch Health Sys1c·ms Uurcau C1vtl Ui\ 1:-,1011 I k:tlth Rc:-.ourcc:-. :111d SL·n 1,·L·s l .S. lkparl1111..'11l nl' lt1,I ll'L' .\d1n1nistrali(>n P.O. Ro:-.. l--l6 L'.~. Lkparlmcnl ol I kalth lknj.1111111 rranh.1111 ~1at1on Jnd Human Sen 1cc, \\-ashinf!t0n. DC 200➔4-0146 5/100 I· ishcrs Lllw. UX'.\ 1-tllH l'cl: ! 202 J (ll 6-_,<,<,5 R,1ch·il le. \,tr) 20X:'-i7 Clinstine. \ 1. Heccrla u:-doJ.!.!O\ I >:11cd ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 2: USCOURTS-cofc-1_19-vv-01455-1 Date issued/filed: 2024-03-25 Pages: 3 Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 2/27/2024) regarding 73 DECISION of Special Master. Signed by Special Master Daniel T. Horner. (ksb) Service on parties made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:19-vv-01455-UNJ Document 76 Filed 03/25/24 Page 1 of 3 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 19-1455V Filed: February 27, 2024 SABRINA COMPTON, and WAYNE COMPTON on behalf of L.C., a minor child, Petitioners, v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Diana Lynn Stadelnikas, Maglio Christopher and Toale, PA, Sarasota, FL, for petitioner. Lara A. Englund, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent. DECISION AWARDING ADDITIONAL DAMAGES1 On February 22, 2024, petitioners filed a joint motion to amend the judgment pursuant to Rule 60(b) of the Rules of the Court of Federal Claims (“RCFC”) and Vaccine Rule 36(b). (ECF No. 72.) Because petitioners have demonstrated circumstances justifying relief under RCFC 60(b)(6), their motion is hereby granted and judgment is entered as set forth below. I. Procedural History On September 23, 2019, petitioners filed a petition on behalf of their minor child, L.C., under the National Childhood Vaccine Act, 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-10, et seq. (“Vaccine Act”).2 (ECF No. 1.) Petitioners alleged that, as result of a Measles, Mumps, Rubella vaccination and a Varicella vaccination on April 18, 2018, L.C. suffered 1 Because this document 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 document 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 “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa (2012). Case 1:19-vv-01455-UNJ Document 76 Filed 03/25/24 Page 2 of 3 symptoms, including full body urticaria, gait imbalance, left-sided weakness, and brain MRI studies positive for white matter patches, that were subsequently diagnosed as acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (“ADEM”). (Id. at 1-2.) On March 13, 2023, a decision was entered awarding compensation to petitioners based on the parties’ joint stipulation. (ECF No. 60.) Judgment was entered on April 14, 2023, awarding inter alia a lump sum of $33,299.43, representing reimbursement of a Florida Medicaid lien for services rendered on behalf of L.C., in the form of a check payable jointly to petitioners and Equian. On February 22, 2024, petitioners filed a joint motion requesting relief from judgment by amending the judgment to account for a correction in the amount of an overpayment of the Florida Medicaid lien. (ECF No. 72.) II. Applicable Legal Standards Under Vaccine Rule 36(b), a party may seek relief from judgment by filing a motion pursuant to RCFC 60. Rule 60(b) provides an exception to the finality of judgments upon a showing of extraordinary circumstances. Kennedy v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 99 Fed. Cl. 535, 547-48 (2011), aff’d per curiam, 485 Fed. App’x 435 (Fed. Cir. 2012). “The court has discretion regarding whether to grant relief under rule 60(b), ‘and the court may weigh equitable considerations in the exercise of its discretion.’” Brunker v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., No. 18-683V, 2023 WL 19145, at *1 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Jan. 3, 2023) (quoting Curtis v. United States, 61 Fed. Cl. 511, 512 (2004)). Under Rule 60(b), the court may grant relief from a final judgment on the following grounds: (1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect; (2) newly discovered evidence . . . ; (3) fraud . . . , misrepresentation, or misconduct by an opposing party; (4) the judgment is void; (5) the judgment has been satisfied, released, or discharged; it is based on an earlier judgment that has been reversed or vacated; or applying it prospectively is no longer equitable; or (6) any other reason that justifies relief. RCFC 60(b). III. Analysis In support of the Motion to Amend Judgment, petitioners state that they received correspondence in December of 2023 from Equian, the subrogation company for Anthem Medicaid, indicating that the Florida Medicaid lien had been overpaid in the amount of $24,319.12. Thus, petitioners indicate that judgment resulted in an overpayment of $24,319.12, and that counsel became aware of the overpayment after judgment had entered. Petitioners request that the undersigned issue an Amended Decision and Judgment, directing Equain to issue a check in the amount of $24,319.12 to respondent. Respondent does not object to this request. 2 Case 1:19-vv-01455-UNJ Document 76 Filed 03/25/24 Page 3 of 3 Rule 60(b)(6) provides for relief from judgment upon a showing of “any other reason that justifies relief.” I find that petitioners’ have demonstrated a sufficient reason justifying relief, namely, that their requested relief is necessary to correct a clear error. E.g., Stamm v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., No. 17-0103V, 2018 WL 5260681 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Aug. 10, 2018); Nilsen v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., No. 14- 0968V, 2016 WL 5210773 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Mar. 15, 2016); Greenberg v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., No. 19-0075V, 2021 WL 1574071 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Mar. 19, 2021). IV. Conclusion Accordingly, petitioners’ motion to amend judgment is hereby GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is directed to issue judgment in favor of respondent as follows: • A lump sum of $24,319.12, which amount represents reimbursement of an overpayment made to Equian as reimbursement of a Florida Medicaid lien for services rendered on behalf of L.C. Equian shall send the check with a cover letter that includes the case name and VICP case number, and noting overpayment of the lien. The check shall be made payable to “Department of Health and Human Services” and forwarded to the following address: Department of Health and Human Services Program Support Center, Financial Management Portfolio 5600 Fishers Lain Mailstop 08N108A Rockville, MD 20857 • A copy of the revised check shall also be sent to Jean Jackson via electronic mail at jjackson@hrsa.gov. In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the clerk of the court is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this decision.3 IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Daniel T. Horner Daniel T. Horner Special Master 3 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 ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 3: USCOURTS-cofc-1_19-vv-01455-cl-extra-10735852 Date issued/filed: 2024-03-25 Pages: 1 Docket text: Supplementary opinion from CourtListener cluster 10269262 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 19-1455V Filed: February 27, 2024 SABRINA COMPTON, and WAYNE COMPTON on behalf of L.C., a minor child, Petitioners, v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Diana Lynn Stadelnikas, Maglio Christopher and Toale, PA, Sarasota, FL, for petitioner. Lara A. Englund, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent. DECISION AWARDING ADDITIONAL DAMAGES1 On February 22, 2024, petitioners filed a joint motion to amend the judgment pursuant to Rule 60(b) of the Rules of the Court of Federal Claims (“RCFC”) and Vaccine Rule 36(b). (ECF No. 72.) Because petitioners have demonstrated circumstances justifying relief under RCFC 60(b)(6), their motion is hereby granted and judgment is entered as set forth below. I. Procedural History On September 23, 2019, petitioners filed a petition on behalf of their minor child, L.C., under the National Childhood Vaccine Act, 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-10, et seq. (“Vaccine Act”).2 (ECF No. 1.) Petitioners alleged that, as result of a Measles, Mumps, Rubella vaccination and a Varicella vaccination on April 18, 2018, L.C. suffered 1 Because this document 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 document 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 “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa (2012). symptoms, including full body urticaria, gait imbalance, left-sided weakness, and brain MRI studies positive for white matter patches, that were subsequently diagnosed as acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (“ADEM”). (Id. at 1-2.) On March 13, 2023, a decision was entered awarding compensation to petitioners based on the parties’ joint stipulation. (ECF No. 60.) Judgment was entered on April 14, 2023, awarding inter alia a lump sum of $33,299.43, representing reimbursement of a Florida Medicaid lien for services rendered on behalf of L.C., in the form of a check payable jointly to petitioners and Equian. On February 22, 2024, petitioners filed a joint motion requesting relief from judgment by amending the judgment to account for a correction in the amount of an overpayment of the Florida Medicaid lien. (ECF No. 72.) II. Applicable Legal Standards Under Vaccine Rule 36(b), a party may seek relief from judgment by filing a motion pursuant to RCFC 60. Rule 60(b) provides an exception to the finality of judgments upon a showing of extraordinary circumstances. Kennedy v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 99 Fed. Cl. 535, 547-48 (2011), aff’d per curiam, 485 Fed. App’x 435 (Fed. Cir. 2012). “The court has discretion regarding whether to grant relief under rule 60(b), ‘and the court may weigh equitable considerations in the exercise of its discretion.’” Brunker v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., No. 18-683V, 2023 WL 19145, at *1 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Jan. 3, 2023) (quoting Curtis v. United States, 61 Fed. Cl. 511, 512 (2004)). Under Rule 60(b), the court may grant relief from a final judgment on the following grounds: (1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect; (2) newly discovered evidence . . . ; (3) fraud . . . , misrepresentation, or misconduct by an opposing party; (4) the judgment is void; (5) the judgment has been satisfied, released, or discharged; it is based on an earlier judgment that has been reversed or vacated; or applying it prospectively is no longer equitable; or (6) any other reason that justifies relief. RCFC 60(b). III. Analysis In support of the Motion to Amend Judgment, petitioners state that they received correspondence in December of 2023 from Equian, the subrogation company for Anthem Medicaid, indicating that the Florida Medicaid lien had been overpaid in the amount of $24,319.12. Thus, petitioners indicate that judgment resulted in an overpayment of $24,319.12, and that counsel became aware of the overpayment after judgment had entered. Petitioners request that the undersigned issue an Amended Decision and Judgment, directing Equain to issue a check in the amount of $24,319.12 to respondent. Respondent does not object to this request. 2 Rule 60(b)(6) provides for relief from judgment upon a showing of “any other reason that justifies relief.” I find that petitioners’ have demonstrated a sufficient reason justifying relief, namely, that their requested relief is necessary to correct a clear error. E.g., Stamm v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., No. 17-0103V, 2018 WL 5260681 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Aug. 10, 2018); Nilsen v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., No. 14- 0968V, 2016 WL 5210773 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Mar. 15, 2016); Greenberg v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., No. 19-0075V, 2021 WL 1574071 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Mar. 19, 2021). IV. Conclusion Accordingly, petitioners’ motion to amend judgment is hereby GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is directed to issue judgment in favor of respondent as follows: • A lump sum of $24,319.12, which amount represents reimbursement of an overpayment made to Equian as reimbursement of a Florida Medicaid lien for services rendered on behalf of L.C. Equian shall send the check with a cover letter that includes the case name and VICP case number, and noting overpayment of the lien. The check shall be made payable to “Department of Health and Human Services” and forwarded to the following address: Department of Health and Human Services Program Support Center, Financial Management Portfolio 5600 Fishers Lain Mailstop 08N108A Rockville, MD 20857 • A copy of the revised check shall also be sent to Jean Jackson via electronic mail at jjackson@hrsa.gov. In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the clerk of the court is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this decision.3 IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Daniel T. Horner Daniel T. Horner Special Master 3 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 ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 4: USCOURTS-cofc-1_19-vv-01455-cl-extra-10734349 Date issued/filed: 2024-09-04 Pages: 1 Docket text: Supplementary opinion from CourtListener cluster 10267759 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 19-1455V Filed: May 17, 2024 SABRINA COMPTON, and WAYNE Special Master Horner COMPTON on behalf of L.C., a minor child, Petitioner, v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Diana Lynn Stadelnikas, Maglio Christopher & Toale, PA, Sarasota, FL, for petitioner. Lara Ann Englund, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent. DECISION ON ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS1 On September 23, 2019, petitioners filed a petition on behalf of their minor child, L.C., under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq.2 (the “Vaccine Act”). (ECF No. 1) Petitioners alleged that, as result of a Measles, Mumps, Rubella vaccination and a Varicella vaccination on April 18, 2018, L.C. suffered symptoms, including full body urticaria, gait imbalance, left-sided weakness, and brain MRI studies positive for white matter patches, that were subsequently diagnosed as acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (“ADEM”). (Id. at 1-2.) On March 13, 2023, a decision was entered awarding compensation to petitioners based on the parties’ joint stipulation. 3 (ECF No. 60.) 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), Petitioners have 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 On February 22, 2024, petitioners filed a joint motion requesting to amend the judgment to account for a correction in the amount of an overpayment of the Florida Medicaid lien, which I granted and awarded on February 27, 2024. (ECF Nos. 72-73). On September 24, 2023, petitioners filed a motion for attorneys’ fees and costs. (ECF No. 66.) (“Fees App.”) Petitioners request the following compensation: attorneys’ fees and costs in the amount of $165,184.91 (representing $130,491.00 in fees and $34,693.91 in costs) for the work of their counsel at mctlaw, attorneys’ fees and costs in the amount of $3,426.91 (representing $2,987.50 in fees and $439.41 in costs) for the guardianship work of their counsel at Haag Friedrich & Williams P.A., $1,231.00 for the Guardian Ad Litem work of Joesph Indelicato, Esq., and $7,440.00 in future attorneys’ fees and costs for maintaining the required guardianship of the award until L.C. reaches the age of majority. (Id. at 1-3.) Pursuant to General Order No. 9, petitioners warrant they did not personally incur any costs in pursuit of this litigation. Ex. 40 at 1. On October 6, 2023, respondent filed a response to petitioners’ motion. (ECF No. 67.) Respondent argues that “[n]either the Vaccine Act nor Vaccine Rule 13 requires respondent to file a response to a request by a petitioner for an award of attorneys' fees and costs.” (Id. at 1.) Respondent adds, however, that he “is satisfied the statutory requirements for an award of attorneys’ fees and costs are met in this case.” (Id. at 2.) Respondent “respectfully requests that the Court exercise its discretion and determine a reasonable award for attorneys’ fees and costs.” (Id. at 3.) Petitioners filed their reply requesting the Court award attorneys’ fees and costs in full. (ECF No. 68). This matter is now ripe for consideration. I. Reasonable Attorneys’ Fees and Costs The Vaccine Act permits an award of reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs. § 15(e). The Federal Circuit has approved the lodestar approach to determine reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs under the Vaccine Act. Avera v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 515 F.3d 1343, 1347 (Fed. Cir. 2008). This is a two-step process. Id. at 1347- 48. First, a court determines an “initial estimate . . . by ‘multiplying the number of hours reasonably expended on the litigation times a reasonable hourly rate.’” Id. (quoting Blum v. Stenson, 465 U.S. 886, 888 (1984)). Second, the court may make an upward or downward departure from the initial calculation of the fee award based on specific findings. Id. at 1348. It is “well within the special master’s discretion” to determine the reasonableness of fees. Saxton v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 3 F.3d 1517, 1521–22 (Fed. Cir. 1993); see also Hines v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 22 Cl. Ct. 750, 753 (1991). (“[T]he reviewing court must grant the special master wide latitude in determining the reasonableness of both attorneys’ fees and costs.”). Applications for attorneys’ fees must include contemporaneous and specific billing records that indicate the work performed and the number of hours spent on said work. See Savin v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 85 Fed. Cl. 313, 316–18 (2008). Such applications, however, should not include hours that are “‘excessive, redundant, or otherwise unnecessary.’” Saxton, 3 F.3d at 1521 (quoting Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424, 434 (1983)). 3 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). 2 Reasonable hourly rates are determined by looking at the “prevailing market rate” in the relevant community. See Blum, 465 U.S. at 894-95. The “prevailing market rate” is akin to the rate “in the community for similar services by lawyers of reasonably comparable skill, experience and reputation.” Id. at 895, n.11. Petitioners bear the burden of providing adequate evidence to prove that the requested hourly rate is reasonable. Id. Special masters can reduce a fee request sua sponte, without providing petitioners notice and opportunity to respond. See Sabella v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 86 Fed. Cl. 201, 209 (Fed. Cl. 2009). When determining the relevant fee reduction, special masters need not engage in a line-by-line analysis of petitioners’ fee application. Broekelschen v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 102 Fed. Cl. 719, 729 (Fed. Cl. 2011). Instead, they may rely on their experience with the Vaccine Program to determine the reasonable number of hours expended. Wasson v. Sec’y of Dep’t of Health & Human Servs., 24 Cl. Ct. 482, 484 (1991), rev’d on other grounds and aff’d in relevant part, 988 F.2d 131 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Just as “[t]rial courts routinely use their prior experience to reduce hourly rates and the number of hours claimed in attorney fee requests . . . Vaccine program special masters are also entitled to use their prior experience in reviewing fee applications.” Saxton, 3 F.3d at 1521. a. Hourly Rates Petitioners request the following rates of compensation for their attorneys at mctlaw: for Ms. Diana Stadelnikas: $396.00 per hour for work performed in 2018, $415.00 per hour for work performed in 2019, $440.00 per hour for work performed in 2020, $470.00 per hour for work performed in 2021, $490.00 per hour for work performed in 2022, and $525.00 per hour for work performed in 2023; for Mr. Altom Maglio: $400.00 per hour for work performed in 2019; and, for Ms. Danielle Strait: $415.00 per hour for work performed in 2022. Ex. 38 at 56-57. These rates are consistent with what counsel have previously been awarded for their Vaccine Program work and I find them to be reasonable herein. I shall also award the requested paralegal time at the provided rates.4 b. Hours Expended Attorneys’ fees are awarded for the “number of hours reasonably expended on the litigation.” Avera, 515 F.3d at 1348. Counsel should not include in their fee requests 4The rates for the 14 paralegals who worked on this matter are also consistent with what has been previously awarded and in accordance with the Office of Special Masters’ fee schedule. Specifically, Aisha Jones charged $170.00 per hour for work performed in 2022. Amy Semanie charged $145.00 in 2020, $155.00 in 2021, and $160.00 in 2022. Audrey Harper charged $165.00 in 2021. Chelsea Harris charged $170.00 in 2022. Dashea King charged $145.00 in 2019 and 2020. Jennifer Gutierrez charged $160.00 in 2020. Katherine Ochoa Castillo charged $154.00 in 2019. Kendall Wallin charged $165.00 in 2021. Kimberly Dutra charged $148.00 in 2018, $154.00 in 2019, $160.00 in 2020, $165.00 in 2021, and $170.00 in 2022. Lindsay Wilkinson and Mackenzie Riordan both charged $160.00 in 2021 and 2022. Madison Alexander charged $165.00 in 2021, $170.00 in 2022. Mandy Houston charged $145.00 in 2019 and 2020. Melissa Sealy charged $170.00 in 2022, and $180.00 in 2023. Ex. 38 at 56-57. 3 hours that are “excessive, redundant, or otherwise unnecessary.” Saxton, 3 F.3d at 1521. While attorneys may be compensated for non-attorney-level work, the rate must be comparable to what would be paid for a paralegal or secretary. See O'Neill v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., No. 08–243V, 2015 WL 2399211, at *9 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Apr. 28, 2015). Clerical and secretarial tasks should not be billed at all, regardless of who performs them. See, e.g., McCulloch, 2015 WL 5634323, at *26. Upon review, the overall number of hours billed appears to be reasonable. I have reviewed the billing entries and find that they adequately describe the work done on the case and the amount of time spent on that work. I do not find any of the entries to be objectionable, nor has respondent identified any as such. Petitioners are therefore awarded final attorneys’ fees of $130,491.00. c. Attorneys’ Costs Like attorneys’ fees, a request for reimbursement of attorneys’ costs must be reasonable. Perreira v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 27 Fed. Cl. 29, 34 (Fed. Cl. 1992). Petitioners request a total of $34,693.91 in attorneys’ costs. Fees App. at 1. These costs are comprised of acquisition of medical records, the Court’s filing fee, and postage. This amount also includes life care planning services performed by The Coordinating Center, Medical Legal Services, in the amount of $30,380.00, at a rate of $175.00 per hour. Ex. 39 at 2-4. I find that these costs have been supported with the necessary documentation and are reasonable. Petitioners are therefore awarded the full amount of costs sought. d. Fees and Costs for Guardianship and Guardian Ad Litem Work Petitioners request attorneys’ fees and costs in the amount of $3,426.91 (representing $2,987.50 in fees and $439.41 in costs) for the guardianship work of their counsel at Haag, Friedrich and Williams, P.A. Petitioners also request $1,231.00 for the Guardian Ad Litem work of Joesph Indelicato, Esq. Fees App. at 2. I have reviewed the submitted billing statements for the guardianship work performed and find the requested attorneys’ fees and costs to be reasonable. Additionally, respondent has not raised any objection to this work performed. Accordingly, I find that Haag, Friedrich and Williams, P.A., and Joesph Indelicato, Esq., respectively, are entitled to full reimbursement for all fees and costs incurred as part of the guardianship proceedings. e. Attorneys' Fees and Costs for Guardianship Maintenance Petitioners request a total of $7,440.00, calculated with an annual amount of $620.00, in future attorneys’ fees necessary for maintaining L.C.’s portion of the award until he reaches the age of majority. Fees App. at 4. Per the Federal Circuit’s decision in McCulloch v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., costs associated with maintenance of the guardianship fall under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(e)(1) as reasonable attorneys’ fees and other costs “incurred in any 4 proceeding on [a Vaccine Act] petition.” 923. F.3d 998, 1003 (Fed. Cir. 2019). Accordingly, the award of such future fees and costs is proper in the instant case. Concerning the reasonableness of the future attorneys’ fees and costs, petitioners have submitted a statement from counsel at Haag, Friedrich & Williams, P.A., which breaks down the amount of attorney hours required for each guardianship accounting as well as court filing fees. Ex. 44 at 1. I have reviewed the projection of future fees and costs by the Haag, Friedrich & Williams, P.A. The anticipated fees and costs appear reasonable. Respondent also has not challenged the anticipated future fees and costs as unreasonable. Accordingly, I find these costs to be reasonable and shall award them in full. II. Conclusion In accordance with the Vaccine Act, 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(e) (2012), I have reviewed the billing records and costs in this case and finds that petitioners’ request for fees and costs is reasonable. Accordingly, I award the following: 1) a lump sum in the amount of $165,184.91, representing reimbursement for petitioner's attorneys’ fees and costs, in the form of a check payable to petitioners and petitioners’ counsel, mctlaw; 2) a lump sum in the amount of $3,426.91, representing reimbursement for petitioners’ guardianship attorneys’ fees and costs, in the form of a check payable to petitioners and Haag, Friedrich & Williams, P.A.; 3) a lump sum in the amount of $1,231.00, representing reimbursement for the Guardian Ad Litem’s fees and costs, in the form of a check payable to petitioners and Joseph Indelicato, Esq.; and, 4) a lump sum in the amount of $7,440.00, representing future attorneys’ fees and costs for guardianship maintenance, in the form of a check payable to petitioner, Sabrina Compton, as appointed Guardian of the Property of L.C. Petitioners request all checks be forwarded to mctlaw, 1605 Main Street, Suite 710, Sarasota, Florida, 34236. In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment in accordance herewith.5 5 Entry of judgment can be expedited by each party’s filing of a notice renouncing the right to seek review. Vaccine Rule 11(a). 5 IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Daniel T. Horner Daniel T. Horner Special Master 6