VICP Registry Case Source Bundle Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_20-vv-01281 Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_20-vv-01281 Petitioner: Larry J. Demas Filed: 2020-09-28 Decided: 2025-04-21 Vaccine: influenza Vaccination date: 2017-09-26 Condition: Bell's palsy Outcome: compensated Award amount USD: 20000 AI-assisted case summary: On September 28, 2020, Larry J. Demas filed a petition alleging that an influenza vaccination administered on September 26, 2017 caused Bell's palsy. Respondent denied that the flu vaccine caused the alleged Bell's palsy, any residual effects, or any other injury. The public stipulation does not describe Mr. Demas's onset interval, facial weakness, medical visits, diagnostic testing, treatment, recovery, expert opinions, or biological mechanism. It does show that the parties maintained their positions but agreed to settle liability and damages. On April 21, 2025, Special Master Jennifer A. Shah adopted the stipulation and awarded $20,000.00 as a lump sum through counsel for all damages available under the Vaccine Act. Later attorney-fee and cost awards in the record were litigation payments, not additional injury compensation. Theory of causation field: Adult petitioner; influenza vaccine September 26, 2017; alleged Bell's palsy. COMPENSATED by stipulation. Respondent denied causation and residual effects; public text provides no onset, clinical course, testing, treatment, experts, or mechanism. Special Master Jennifer A. Shah decision April 21, 2025. Award $20,000.00 lump sum. Petition filed September 28, 2020. Counsel: Max Peter Petrunya. Public staged source text: ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_20-vv-01281-0 Date issued/filed: 2025-06-05 Pages: 7 Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 4/21/2025) regarding 97 DECISION of Special Master - Stipulation. Signed by Special Master Jennifer A. Shah. (sl) Service on parties made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:20-vv-01281-UNJ Document 102 Filed 06/05/25 Page 1 of 7 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 20-1281V * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * LARRY J. DEMAS, * * UNPUBLISHED Petitioner, * * * v. * * Filed: April 21, 2025 SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND * HUMAN SERVICES, * * * Respondent. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Max Petrunya, Max Petrunya, P.C., Pittsburgh, PA, for Petitioner Mary Holmes, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1 On September 28, 2020, Larry J. Demas (“Petitioner”) filed a petition, seeking compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (“the Vaccine Program”).2 Pet., ECF No. 1. Petitioner alleges he suffered from Bell’s Palsy as a result of the influenza (“flu”) vaccination he received on September 26, 2017. See Stipulation ¶ 2, 4, dated April 21, 2025 (ECF No. 96); see also Petition. Respondent denies “that petitioner’s alleged Bell’s Palsy or its residual effects were caused-in-fact by the flu vaccine; and denies that the flu vaccine caused petitioner any other injury 1 Although this Decision has been formally designated “not to be published,” it will nevertheless be posted on the Court of Federal Claims’ website in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002, 44 U.S.C. § 3501 (2012). This means the Decision will be available to anyone with access to the internet. As provided by 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-12(d)(4)(B), however, the parties may object to the Decision’s inclusion of certain kinds of confidential information. Specifically, under Vaccine Rule 18(b), each party has fourteen days within which to request redaction “of any information furnished by that party: (1) that is a trade secret or commercial or financial in substance and is privileged or confidential; or (2) that includes medical files or similar files, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy.” Vaccine Rule 18(b). Otherwise, the Decision in its present form will be available. Id. 2 The Vaccine Program comprises Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755 (codified as amended at 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-10–34 (2012)) (hereinafter “Vaccine Act” or “the Act”). All subsequent references to sections of the Vaccine Act shall be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa. Case 1:20-vv-01281-UNJ Document 102 Filed 06/05/25 Page 2 of 7 or petitioner’s current condition.” See Stipulation ¶ 6. Nonetheless, both parties, while maintaining their above-stated positions, agreed in a stipulation filed April 21, 2025, that the issues before them can be settled and that a decision should be entered awarding Petitioner compensation. I have reviewed the file, and based upon that review, I conclude that the parties’ stipulation is reasonable. I therefore adopt it as my decision in awarding damages on the terms set forth therein. The stipulation awards: a lump sum of $20,000.00, to be paid through an ACH deposit to Petitioner’s counsel’s IOLTA account for prompt disbursement to Petitioner. Stipulation ¶ 8. This award represents compensation for all damages that would be available under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). I approve a Vaccine Program award in the requested amount set forth above to be made to Petitioner. 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.3 IT IS SO ORDERED. s/ Jennifer A. Shah Jennifer A. Shah Special Master 3 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties may expedite entry of judgment by jointly filing notice renouncing their right to seek review. 2 Case 1:20-vv-01281-UNJ Document 102 Filed 06/05/25 Page 3 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS ____________________________________ ) LARRY J. DEMAS, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) No. 20-1281V v. ) Special Master Shah ) ECF SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND ) HUMAN SERVICES, ) ) Respondent. ) ____________________________________) STIPULATION The parties hereby stipulate to the following matters: 1. Larry J. Demas, petitioner, 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 petitioner’s receipt of an influenza (“flu”) vaccination, which vaccine is contained in the Vaccine Injury Table (the “Table”), 42 C.F.R. § 100.3 (a). 2. Petitioner received the flu vaccination on September 26, 2017. 3. The vaccination was administered within the United States. 4. Petitioner alleges that petitioner suffered from Bell’s Palsy that was caused-in-fact by the September 26, 2017 flu vaccination. Petitioner further alleges that petitioner suffered the residual effects of the alleged injury for more than six months. 5. Petitioner represents that there has been no prior award or settlement of a civil action for damages on petitioner’s behalf as a result of the alleged injury. 6. Respondent denies that petitioner’s alleged Bell’s Palsy or its residual effects were caused-in-fact by the flu vaccine; and denies that the flu vaccine caused petitioner any other Case 1:20-vv-01281-UNJ Document 102 Filed 06/05/25 Page 4 of 7 injury or petitioner’s current condition. 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 payment: A lump sum of $20,000.00 to be paid through an ACH deposit to petitioner’s counsel’s IOLTA account for prompt disbursement to petitioner. This amount represents compensation for all damages that would be available under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). 9. As soon as practicable after the entry of judgment on entitlement in this case, and after petitioner has filed both a proper and timely election to receive compensation pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-21(a)(1), 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. 10. Petitioner and petitioner’s 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-15(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 (42 U.S.C. § 1396 et seq.)), or by entities that provide health services on a pre-paid basis. 2 Case 1:20-vv-01281-UNJ Document 102 Filed 06/05/25 Page 5 of 7 11. Payment made pursuant to paragraph 8 and any amounts awarded pursuant to paragraph 9 of this Stipulation will be made in accordance with 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(i), subject to the availability of sufficient statutory funds. 12. The parties and their attorneys further agree and stipulate that, except for any award for attorneys’ fees and litigation costs, and past unreimbursed expenses, the money provided pursuant to this Stipulation will be used solely for the benefit of petitioner as contemplated by a strict construction of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a) and (d), and subject to the conditions of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(g) and (h). 13. In return for the payments described in paragraphs 8 and 9, petitioner, in petitioner’s individual capacity, and on behalf of petitioner’s heirs, executors, administrators, successors or assigns, does 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. § 300aa-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 petitioner resulting from, or alleged to have resulted from, the flu vaccination administered on September 26, 2017, as alleged in a petition for vaccine compensation filed on or about September 28, 2020, in the United States Court of Federal Claims as petition No. 20-1281V. 14. If petitioner should die prior to entry of judgment, this agreement shall be voidable upon proper notice to the Court on behalf of either or both of the parties. 3 Case 1:20-vv-01281-UNJ Document 102 Filed 06/05/25 Page 6 of 7 15. 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. 16. 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 9 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. 17. This Stipulation shall not be construed as an admission by the United States or the Secretary of Health and Human Services that the flu vaccine caused petitioner’s alleged injury or any other injury or petitioner’s current condition. 18. All rights and obligations of petitioner hereunder shall apply equally to petitioner’s heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and/or assigns. END OF STIPULATION / / / / / / / / / / 4 Case 1:20-vv-01281-UNJ Document 102 Filed 06/05/25 Page 7 of 7 ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 2: USCOURTS-cofc-1_20-vv-01281-cl-extra-11065688 Date issued/filed: 2025-06-05 Pages: 1 Docket text: Supplementary opinion from CourtListener cluster 10599100 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 20-1281V ************************* * * LARRY J. DEMAS, * * * UNPUBLISHED Petitioner, * * v. * * * Filed: April 21, 2025 SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND * HUMAN SERVICES, * * * Respondent. * * ************************* * Max Petrunya, Max Petrunya, P.C., Pittsburgh, PA, for Petitioner Mary Holmes, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1 On September 28, 2020, Larry J. Demas (“Petitioner”) filed a petition, seeking compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (“the Vaccine Program”).2 Pet., ECF No. 1. Petitioner alleges he suffered from Bell’s Palsy as a result of the influenza (“flu”) vaccination he received on September 26, 2017. See Stipulation ¶ 2, 4, dated April 21, 2025 (ECF No. 96); see also Petition. Respondent denies “that petitioner’s alleged Bell’s Palsy or its residual effects were caused-in-fact by the flu vaccine; and denies that the flu vaccine caused petitioner any other injury 1 Although this Decision has been formally designated “not to be published,” it will nevertheless be posted on the Court of Federal Claims’ website in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002, 44 U.S.C. § 3501 (2012). This means the Decision will be available to anyone with access to the internet. As provided by 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-12(d)(4)(B), however, the parties may object to the Decision’s inclusion of certain kinds of confidential information. Specifically, under Vaccine Rule 18(b), each party has fourteen days within which to request redaction “of any information furnished by that party: (1) that is a trade secret or commercial or financial in substance and is privileged or confidential; or (2) that includes medical files or similar files, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy.” Vaccine Rule 18(b). Otherwise, the Decision in its present form will be available. Id. 2 The Vaccine Program comprises Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755 (codified as amended at 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-10–34 (2012)) (hereinafter “Vaccine Act” or “the Act”). All subsequent references to sections of the Vaccine Act shall be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa. or petitioner’s current condition.” See Stipulation ¶ 6. Nonetheless, both parties, while maintaining their above-stated positions, agreed in a stipulation filed April 21, 2025, that the issues before them can be settled and that a decision should be entered awarding Petitioner compensation. I have reviewed the file, and based upon that review, I conclude that the parties’ stipulation is reasonable. I therefore adopt it as my decision in awarding damages on the terms set forth therein. The stipulation awards: a lump sum of $20,000.00, to be paid through an ACH deposit to Petitioner’s counsel’s IOLTA account for prompt disbursement to Petitioner. Stipulation ¶ 8. This award represents compensation for all damages that would be available under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). I approve a Vaccine Program award in the requested amount set forth above to be made to Petitioner. 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.3 IT IS SO ORDERED. s/ Jennifer A. Shah Jennifer A. Shah Special Master 3 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties may expedite entry of judgment by jointly filing notice renouncing their right to seek review. 2 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS ____________________________________ ) LARRY J. DEMAS, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) No. 20-1281V v. ) Special Master Shah ) ECF SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND ) HUMAN SERVICES, ) ) Respondent. ) ____________________________________) STIPULATION The parties hereby stipulate to the following matters: 1. Larry J. Demas, petitioner, 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 petitioner’s receipt of an influenza (“flu”) vaccination, which vaccine is contained in the Vaccine Injury Table (the “Table”), 42 C.F.R. § 100.3 (a). 2. Petitioner received the flu vaccination on September 26, 2017. 3. The vaccination was administered within the United States. 4. Petitioner alleges that petitioner suffered from Bell’s Palsy that was caused-in-fact by the September 26, 2017 flu vaccination. Petitioner further alleges that petitioner suffered the residual effects of the alleged injury for more than six months. 5. Petitioner represents that there has been no prior award or settlement of a civil action for damages on petitioner’s behalf as a result of the alleged injury. 6. Respondent denies that petitioner’s alleged Bell’s Palsy or its residual effects were caused-in-fact by the flu vaccine; and denies that the flu vaccine caused petitioner any other injury or petitioner’s current condition. 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 payment: A lump sum of $20,000.00 to be paid through an ACH deposit to petitioner’s counsel’s IOLTA account for prompt disbursement to petitioner. This amount represents compensation for all damages that would be available under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). 9. As soon as practicable after the entry of judgment on entitlement in this case, and after petitioner has filed both a proper and timely election to receive compensation pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-21(a)(1), 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. 10. Petitioner and petitioner’s 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-15(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 (42 U.S.C. § 1396 et seq.)), or by entities that provide health services on a pre-paid basis. 2 11. Payment made pursuant to paragraph 8 and any amounts awarded pursuant to paragraph 9 of this Stipulation will be made in accordance with 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(i), subject to the availability of sufficient statutory funds. 12. The parties and their attorneys further agree and stipulate that, except for any award for attorneys’ fees and litigation costs, and past unreimbursed expenses, the money provided pursuant to this Stipulation will be used solely for the benefit of petitioner as contemplated by a strict construction of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a) and (d), and subject to the conditions of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(g) and (h). 13. In return for the payments described in paragraphs 8 and 9, petitioner, in petitioner’s individual capacity, and on behalf of petitioner’s heirs, executors, administrators, successors or assigns, does 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. § 300aa-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 petitioner resulting from, or alleged to have resulted from, the flu vaccination administered on September 26, 2017, as alleged in a petition for vaccine compensation filed on or about September 28, 2020, in the United States Court of Federal Claims as petition No. 20-1281V. 14. If petitioner should die prior to entry of judgment, this agreement shall be voidable upon proper notice to the Court on behalf of either or both of the parties. 3 15. 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. 16. 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 9 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. 17. This Stipulation shall not be construed as an admission by the United States or the Secretary of Health and Human Services that the flu vaccine caused petitioner’s alleged injury or any other injury or petitioner’s current condition. 18. All rights and obligations of petitioner hereunder shall apply equally to petitioner’s heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and/or assigns. END OF STIPULATION / / / / / / / / / / 4 ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 3: USCOURTS-cofc-1_20-vv-01281-cl-extra-11228486 Date issued/filed: 2025-12-19 Pages: 1 Docket text: Supplementary opinion from CourtListener cluster 10761901 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 20-1281V * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * LARRY J. DEMAS, * * Petitioner, * Special Master Shah * v. * Filed: October 31, 2025 * SECRETARY OF HEALTH * AND HUMAN SERVICES, * * Respondent. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Max Peter Petrunya, Max Petrunya P.C., Pittsburgh, PA, for Petitioner. Mary Eileen Holmes, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION ON ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS1 On September 28, 2020, Larry J. Demas (“Petitioner”) filed a petition seeking compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (“the Vaccine Program”).2 Pet. at 1 (ECF No. 1). Petitioner alleged that he suffered from Bell’s Palsy as a result of the influenza (“flu”) vaccination he received on September 26, 2017. Am. Pet. at 1 (ECF No. 71). On April 21, 2025, the parties filed a stipulation, which I adopted in a Decision awarding compensation the same day. ECF Nos. 96, 97. Petitioner was awarded $20,000.00 in damages. ECF No. 97. 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 The Vaccine Program comprises Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755 (codified as amended at 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-10–34 (2018)) (hereinafter “Vaccine Act” or “the Act”). All subsequent references to sections of the Vaccine Act shall be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa. On June 10, 2025, Petitioner filed an application for final attorneys’ fees and costs. ECF No. 103 (“Fees App.”). Petitioner requests a total of $12,658.57 in attorneys’ fees and costs. Fees App. at 1. This consisted of $8,287.50 in attorneys’ fees and $3,609.98 in attorneys’ costs. Id. Petitioner states that he incurred $761.09 in personal costs related to prosecution of this petition. Id. Respondent responded to the motion on June 12, 2025, stating that “Respondent is satisfied that the statutory requirements for an award of attorneys’ fees and costs are met in this case” and “does not object to the overall amount sought, as it is not an unreasonable amount to have been incurred for proceedings in this case to date.” ECF No. 104 (“Fees Resp.”) at 1. Petitioner did not file a reply. This matter is now ripe for consideration. I. Attorneys’ Fees and Costs Section 15(e)(1) of the Vaccine Act allows the special master to award “reasonable attorneys’ fees, and other costs.” § 300aa–15(e)(1)(A)–(B). Petitioners are entitled to an award of reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs if they are entitled to compensation under the Vaccine Act, or, even if they are unsuccessful, they are eligible so long as the special master finds that the petition was filed in good faith and with a reasonable basis. Avera v. Sec’y of Health & Hum. Servs., 515 F.3d 1343, 1352 (Fed. Cir. 2008). Here, because Petitioner was awarded compensation pursuant to a stipulation, he is entitled to a final award of reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs. It is “well within the special master’s discretion” to determine the reasonableness of fees. Saxton v. Sec’y of Health & Hum. Servs., 3 F.3d 1517, 1521-22 (Fed. Cir. 1993); see also Hines v. Sec’y of Health & Hum. 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 describe the work performed and the number of hours spent on said work. See Savin v. Sec’y of Health & Hum. Servs., 85 Fed. Cl. 313, 316-18 (2008). A. Reasonable Hourly Rates Reasonable hourly rates are determined by looking at the “prevailing market rate” in the relevant community. See Blum v. Stenson, 465 U.S. 886, 895 (1984). 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. The petitioner bears the burden of providing adequate evidence to prove that the requested hourly rate is reasonable. Id. Petitioner requests that his attorney, Mr. Max Petrunya, be compensated at the rate of $425.00 per hour for all work performed in this case, from 2023-2025. This is Mr. Petrunya’s first case in the Vaccine Program and therefore the Court has not previously had an opportunity to assess the reasonableness of Mr. Petrunya’s hourly rate. Mr. Petrunya’s affidavit states he was admitted to practice law in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in October 2010 and was admitted to practice before the Court of Federal Claims in 2019. Fees App., Ex. A at 1. Based on my 2 experience, the hourly rate billed and requested by Mr. Petrunya is reasonable and shall be awarded herein. B. Reasonable 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 hours that are “excessive, redundant, or otherwise unnecessary.” Saxton, 3 F.3d at 1521 (quoting Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424, 434 (1983)). Additionally, it is well-established that billing for administrative/clerical tasks is not permitted in the Vaccine Program. See Rochester v. United States, 18 Cl. Ct. 379, 387 (1989); see also Arranga v. Sec’y of Health & Hum. Servs., No. 02- 1616V, 2018 WL 2224959, at *3 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Apr. 12, 2018). I have reviewed the submitted billing entries and find the request to be reasonable. The billing entries contain sufficient detail to assess their reasonableness, and upon review none appear to be objectionable. Respondent also has not indicated that he finds any of the billing entries to be objectionable. Therefore, Petitioner is awarded final attorneys’ fees in the amount of $8,287.50. C. Attorneys’ Costs Like attorneys’ fees, a request for reimbursement of attorneys’ costs must be reasonable. Perreira v. Sec’y of Health & Hum. Servs., 27 Fed. Cl. 29, 34 (Fed. Cl. 1992). Petitioner requests a total of $3,609.98 in attorneys’ costs. This amount consists of costs for acquiring medical records, postage, and expert services provided by Lawrence Steinman, M.D. See Fees App., Ex. C. Petitioner paid Dr. Steinman $3,300.00 as a retainer for providing his expert services in this matter. Fees App., Ex. C at 2. Although Petitioner provided a copy of the check remitted to Dr. Steinman as proof of payment, there was no invoice or documentation submitted to substantiate the amount billed. Per the Guidelines for Practice Under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, “[t]he application for payment of experts’ fees and costs must contain the same supporting documentation that is required for attorneys’ fees and costs. In particular, the expert’s services must be identified with particularity in contemporaneous, dated records indicating the amount of time spent on each task . . . With regard to attorneys’ fees and experts’ fees, the particular tasks for which fees are claimed, the amount of time spent on that task, the person who performed the task, and that person’s billed hourly rate must be identified in contemporaneous, dated records.” See Guidelines for Practice Under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program at 75-78 (emphasis added).3 It is incumbent upon counsel to apprise all experts they retain of the requirements for preparing invoices in the Vaccine Program. Furthermore, Petitioner’s counsel must provide 3 The guidelines for Practice Under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program can be found at: https://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/sites/cfc/files/vaccine_guidelines.pdf 3 sufficient evidence to warrant approval of an expert’s hourly rate. See Vogler v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., No. 11-424V, 2013 WL 1635860, at *2 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Mar. 24, 2013); O'Neill, 2015 WL 2399211, at *2, *15. Special masters, however, have awarded compensation for costs without documentation when they are “satisfied that the costs incurred were related to the proceedings ... and were reasonable.” Erickson v. Sec'y of Health & Hum. Servs., No. 96– 361V, 1999 WL 1268149, at *8 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Dec. 10, 1999); see also English v. Sec’y of Health & Hum. Servs., No. 01–61V, 2006 WL 3419805, at *14–15 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Nov. 9, 2006) (allowing payment for computer research even though no documentation was provided). Petitioner filed a 29-page report from Dr. Steinman as Ex. 4. I believe the $3,300.00 paid to Dr. Steinman for his work in this case is reasonable, but Petitioner’s counsel should be aware that future requests for experts’ costs must be accompanied by the requisite supporting documents. Petitioner has provided adequate documentation supporting the remainder of the requested attorneys’ costs, and Respondent has not identified any specific costs as objectionable. I find these costs to be reasonable and shall fully reimburse them. Accordingly, Petitioner is awarded final attorneys’ costs in the amount of $3,609.98. D. Petitioner’s Personal Costs Petitioner further requests reimbursement of $761.09 for personally-incurred expenses, including a notary fee, a Law Depot subscription fee, faxes, photocopies, postage, the Court’s filing fee, and an emergency room visit copayment in the amount of $150.00. Fees App. at 1. According to the Vaccine Act, compensation awarded under the Vaccine Program includes actual unreimbursable expenses incurred which: (i) resulted from the vaccine-related injury for which the petitioner seeks compensation, (ii) were incurred by or on behalf of the person who suffered such injury, and (iii) were for diagnosis, medical or other remedial care, rehabilitation, developmental evaluation, special education, vocational training and placement, case management services, counseling, emotional or behavioral therapy, residential and custodial care and service expenses, special equipment, related travel expenses, and facilities determined to be reasonably necessary. 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a)(1)(B). Petitioner’s emergency room copayment, incurred approximately one month post-vaccination, was an actual unreimbursable expense as defined by the Act. According to the parties’ joint stipulation, Petitioner’s award of $20,000.00 represented “compensation for all damages that would be available under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a).” ECF No. 97. I find that this expense was covered by the parties’ stipulation and was not a personally incurred cost in prosecution of the claim. This results in a reduction of $150.00. I find remainder of Petitioner’s costs to be reasonable and will award them in full. Accordingly, Petitioner is awarded personal costs in the amount of $611.09. II. Conclusion In accordance with the Vaccine Act, 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(e) (2018), I have reviewed the billing records and costs in this case and find that Petitioner’s request for fees and costs is reasonable to the extent described above. I find that it is reasonable to compensate Petitioner and his counsel as follows: 4 Attorneys’ Fees Requested $8,287.50 (Reduction to Fees) - Total Attorneys’ Fees Awarded $8,287.50 Attorneys’ Costs Requested $3,609.98 (Reduction to Costs) - Total Attorneys’ Costs Awarded $3,609.98 Total Attorneys’ Fees and Costs Awarded $11,897.48 Petitioner’s Costs Requested $761.09 (Reduction to Petitioner’s Costs) ($150.00) Total Petitioner’s Costs Awarded $611.09 Accordingly, I award the following: 1) a lump sum in the amount of $11,897.48, representing reimbursement for Petitioner’s attorneys’ fees and costs, to be paid through an ACH deposit to Petitioner’s counsel’s IOLTA account for prompt disbursement. 2) a lump sum in the amount of $611.09, representing reimbursement for Petitioner’s personal costs, to be paid through an ACH deposit to Petitioner’s counsel’s IOLTA account for prompt disbursement. 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.4 IT IS SO ORDERED. s/ Jennifer A. Shah Jennifer A. Shah Special Master 4 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