VICP Registry Case Source Bundle Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_21-vv-02285 Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_21-vv-02285 Petitioner: Theresa A. Winning Filed: 2021-12-13 Decided: 2023-11-21 Vaccine: influenza Vaccination date: 2021-10-22 Condition: Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS) Outcome: compensated Award amount USD: 220309 AI-assisted case summary: Theresa A. Winning filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, alleging that she developed Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS) caused by an influenza vaccination she received on October 22, 2021. The petition was filed on December 13, 2021. Respondent conceded that Petitioner was entitled to compensation, agreeing that her condition met the criteria set forth in the Vaccine Injury Table and the Qualifications and Aids to Interpretation. Respondent also confirmed that the case was timely filed, the vaccine was received in the United States, and Petitioner satisfied the statutory severity requirement by suffering residual effects for more than six months. A ruling on entitlement was issued on November 7, 2023, finding Petitioner entitled to compensation for GBS. Subsequently, on October 12, 2023, Respondent filed a proffer on award of compensation, indicating that Petitioner should be awarded $220,309.85. This amount included $217,500.00 for pain and suffering and $2,809.85 for unreimbursed out-of-pocket expenses. Petitioner agreed with the proffered award. The Chief Special Master issued a decision awarding damages on November 21, 2023, granting Petitioner a lump sum payment of $220,309.85. Theory of causation field: Table Public staged source text: ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_21-vv-02285-0 Date issued/filed: 2022-12-09 Pages: 2 Docket text: PUBLIC ORDER/RULING (Originally filed: 11/07/2022) regarding 21 Ruling on Entitlement. Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. (kle) Service on parties made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:21-vv-02285-UNJ Document 26 Filed 12/09/22 Page 1 of 2 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 21-2285V UNPUBLISHED THERESA A. WINNING, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: November 7, 2022 v. Special Processing Unit (SPU); SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND Ruling on Entitlement; Concession; HUMAN SERVICES, Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine; Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Respondent. Administration (SIRVA) Daniel A. Singer, Shamberg, Johnson & Bergman, Chtd., Kansas City, MO, for Petitioner. Mark Kim Hellie, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1 On December 13, 2021, Theresa A. Winning filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq.2 (the “Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleges that she develop Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS), which was caused by the influenza (flu) vaccination she received on October 22, 20219. Petition at 1. Petitioner further alleges that the vaccination was administered within the United States, her symptoms have lasted longer than six months, and that she has not filed any action for her vaccine-related injury. Petition at 1, 5. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters. 1 Because this unpublished Ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of Electronic Government Services). This means the Ruling will be available to anyone with access to the internet. In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), Petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to redact medical or other information, the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, I agree that the identified material fits within this definition, I will redact such material from public access. 2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755. Hereinafter, for ease of citation, all section references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa (2012). Case 1:21-vv-02285-UNJ Document 26 Filed 12/09/22 Page 2 of 2 On October 31, 2022, Respondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he concedes that Petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report at 1. Respondent concluded that “in light of the information contained in [P]etitioner’s medical records and affidavit, [he] concedes that entitlement to compensation is appropriate under the terms of the Vaccine Act.” Id. Specifically, Respondent determined that “[P]etitioner has satisfied the criteria set forth in the Vaccine Injury Table (“Table”) and the Qualifications and Aids to Interpretation (“QAI”).” Id. at 6. Respondent further agrees that “the case was timely filed, that the vaccine was received in the United States, and that petitioner satisfies the statutory severity requirement by suffering the residual effects or complications of her injury for more than six months after vaccine administration . . . .” and that “the scope of to be awarded is limited to petitioner’s GBS and its related sequelae only.” Id. In view of Respondent’s position and the evidence of record, I find that Petitioner is entitled to compensation. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Brian H. Corcoran Brian H. Corcoran Chief Special Master 2 ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 2: USCOURTS-cofc-1_21-vv-02285-1 Date issued/filed: 2023-11-21 Pages: 5 Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 10/16/2023) regarding 35 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer. Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. (kle) Service on parties made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:21-vv-02285-UNJ Document 36 Filed 11/21/23 Page 1 of 5 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 21-2285V THERESA A. WINNING, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: October 16, 2023 v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Daniel A. Singer, Howie Law, PC, Dallas, TX, for Petitioner. Mark Kim Hellie, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1 On December 13, 2021, Theresa A. Winning filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq.2 (the “Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleges that she develop Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS), which was caused by the influenza (flu) vaccination she received on October 22, 20219. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters. On November 7, 2023, a ruling on entitlement was issued, finding Petitioner entitled to compensation for GBS. On October 12, 2023, Respondent filed a proffer on award of compensation (“Proffer”) indicating Petitioner should be awarded $220,309.85, including $217,500.00 for pain and suffering and $2,809.85 for unreimbursed out-of- pocket expenses. Proffer at 1-2. In the Proffer, Respondent represented that Petitioner 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 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 (2012). Case 1:21-vv-02285-UNJ Document 36 Filed 11/21/23 Page 2 of 5 agrees with the proffered award. Id. Based on the record as a whole, I find that Petitioner is entitled to an award as stated in the Proffer. Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Proffer, I award Petitioner a lump sum payment of $220,309.85, including $217,500.00 for pain and suffering and $2,809.85 for unreimbursed out-of-pocket expenses in the form of a check payable to Petitioner. This amount represents compensation for all damages that would be available under Section 15(a). The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this decision.3 IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Brian H. Corcoran Brian H. Corcoran Chief 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. 2 Case 1:21-vv-02285-UNJ Document 36 Filed 11/21/23 Page 3 of 5 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS THERESA A. WINNING, Petitioner, Case No. 21-2285V (ECF) v. CHIEF SPECIAL MASTER CORCORAN SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. RESPONDENT’S PROFFER ON AWARD OF COMPENSATION I. Procedural History On December 13, 2021, Theresa A. Winning (“petitioner”) filed a petition for compensation (“Pet.”) under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 to -34 (“Vaccine Act” or “Act”), as amended. Petitioner alleges that she suffered from Guillain-Barré syndrome as a result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccine administered on October 22, 2019. Pet. at 1. On October 31, 2022, respondent filed his Rule 4(c) Report, conceding entitlement in this case. ECF Doc. No. 20 at 1. On November 7, 2022, the Court issued its Ruling on Entitlement, finding that petitioner was entitled to compensation. ECF Doc. No. 21. II. Items of Compensation and Form of the Award Based upon the evidence of record, respondent proffers that petitioner should be awarded $220,309.85. The award is comprised of the following: $217,500.00 for pain Case 1:21-vv-02285-UNJ Document 36 Filed 11/21/23 Page 4 of 5 and suffering and $2,809.85 for unreimbursed out-of-pocket medical expenses. This amount represents all elements of compensation to which petitioner would be entitled under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a) regarding her October 22, 2019, flu vaccination. Petitioner agrees.1 III. Form of the Award The parties recommend that compensation provided to petitioner should be made through a lump sum payment of $220,309.85, in the form of a check payable to petitioner. Petitioner agrees. Petitioner is a competent adult. Evidence of guardianship is not required in this case. Respectfully submitted, BRIAN M. BOYNTON Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General C. SALVATORE D’ALESSIO Director Torts Branch, Civil Division HEATHER L. PEARLMAN Deputy Director Torts Branch, Civil Division DARRYL R. WISHARD Assistant Director Torts Branch, Civil Division 1 Should petitioner die prior to entry of judgment, the parties reserve the right to move the Court for appropriate relief. In particular, respondent would oppose any award for future medical expenses, future lost earnings, and future pain and suffering. 2 Case 1:21-vv-02285-UNJ Document 36 Filed 11/21/23 Page 5 of 5 s/ Mark K. Hellie MARK K. HELLIE Trial Attorney Torts Branch, Civil Division U.S. Department of Justice P.O. Box 146, Benjamin Franklin Station Washington, D.C. 20044-0146 T: (202) 616-4208 E: mark.hellie@usdoj.gov DATED: October 12, 2023 3 ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 3: USCOURTS-cofc-1_21-vv-02285-cl-extra-10736950 Date issued/filed: 2023-11-21 Pages: 1 Docket text: Supplementary opinion from CourtListener cluster 10270360 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 21-2285V THERESA A. WINNING, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: October 16, 2023 v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Daniel A. Singer, Howie Law, PC, Dallas, TX, for Petitioner. Mark Kim Hellie, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1 On December 13, 2021, Theresa A. Winning filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq.2 (the “Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleges that she develop Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS), which was caused by the influenza (flu) vaccination she received on October 22, 20219. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters. On November 7, 2023, a ruling on entitlement was issued, finding Petitioner entitled to compensation for GBS. On October 12, 2023, Respondent filed a proffer on award of compensation (“Proffer”) indicating Petitioner should be awarded $220,309.85, including $217,500.00 for pain and suffering and $2,809.85 for unreimbursed out-of- pocket expenses. Proffer at 1-2. In the Proffer, Respondent represented that Petitioner 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 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 (2012). agrees with the proffered award. Id. Based on the record as a whole, I find that Petitioner is entitled to an award as stated in the Proffer. Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Proffer, I award Petitioner a lump sum payment of $220,309.85, including $217,500.00 for pain and suffering and $2,809.85 for unreimbursed out-of-pocket expenses in the form of a check payable to Petitioner. This amount represents compensation for all damages that would be available under Section 15(a). The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this decision.3 IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Brian H. Corcoran Brian H. Corcoran Chief 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. 2 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS THERESA A. WINNING, Petitioner, Case No. 21-2285V (ECF) v. CHIEF SPECIAL MASTER CORCORAN SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. RESPONDENT’S PROFFER ON AWARD OF COMPENSATION I. Procedural History On December 13, 2021, Theresa A. Winning (“petitioner”) filed a petition for compensation (“Pet.”) under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 to -34 (“Vaccine Act” or “Act”), as amended. Petitioner alleges that she suffered from Guillain-Barré syndrome as a result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccine administered on October 22, 2019. Pet. at 1. On October 31, 2022, respondent filed his Rule 4(c) Report, conceding entitlement in this case. ECF Doc. No. 20 at 1. On November 7, 2022, the Court issued its Ruling on Entitlement, finding that petitioner was entitled to compensation. ECF Doc. No. 21. II. Items of Compensation and Form of the Award Based upon the evidence of record, respondent proffers that petitioner should be awarded $220,309.85. The award is comprised of the following: $217,500.00 for pain and suffering and $2,809.85 for unreimbursed out-of-pocket medical expenses. This amount represents all elements of compensation to which petitioner would be entitled under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a) regarding her October 22, 2019, flu vaccination. Petitioner agrees.1 III. Form of the Award The parties recommend that compensation provided to petitioner should be made through a lump sum payment of $220,309.85, in the form of a check payable to petitioner. Petitioner agrees. Petitioner is a competent adult. Evidence of guardianship is not required in this case. Respectfully submitted, BRIAN M. BOYNTON Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General C. SALVATORE D’ALESSIO Director Torts Branch, Civil Division HEATHER L. PEARLMAN Deputy Director Torts Branch, Civil Division DARRYL R. WISHARD Assistant Director Torts Branch, Civil Division 1 Should petitioner die prior to entry of judgment, the parties reserve the right to move the Court for appropriate relief. In particular, respondent would oppose any award for future medical expenses, future lost earnings, and future pain and suffering. 2 s/ Mark K. Hellie MARK K. HELLIE Trial Attorney Torts Branch, Civil Division U.S. Department of Justice P.O. Box 146, Benjamin Franklin Station Washington, D.C. 20044-0146 T: (202) 616-4208 E: mark.hellie@usdoj.gov DATED: October 12, 2023 3 ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 4: USCOURTS-cofc-1_21-vv-02285-cl-extra-10735536 Date issued/filed: 2024-04-23 Pages: 1 Docket text: Supplementary opinion from CourtListener cluster 10268946 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 21-2285V THERESA A. WINNING, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, v. Filed: March 20, 2024 SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Daniel A. Singer, Howie Law, PC, Dallas, TX, for Petitioner. Mark Kim Hellie, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION ON ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS 1 On December 13, 2021, Theresa A. Winning filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq. 2 (the “Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleged that she developed Guillain-Barré syndrome which was caused by an influenza vaccine she received on October 22, 2019. Petition, ECF No. 1. On October 16, 2023, I issued a decision awarding compensation to Petitioner based on the Respondent’s proffer. ECF No. 35. 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 inf ormation, 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 f rom public access. 2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755. Hereinafter, for ease of citation, all section ref erences to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa (2018). Petitioner has now filed a motion for attorney’s fees and costs, requesting an award of $27,319.13 (representing $24,350.60 in fees plus $2,968.53 in costs). Petitioner’s Application for Fees and Costs (“Motion”) filed Nov. 28, 2023, ECF No. 40. In accordance with General Order No. 9, Petitioner filed a signed statement representing that Petitioner incurred no out-of-pocket expenses. ECF No. 39. Respondent reacted to the motion on Dec. 12, 2023, reporting that he is satisfied that the statutory requirements for an award of attorney’s fees and costs are met in this case, but deferring resolution of the amount to be awarded to my discretion. Respondent’s Response to Motion at 2-3, ECF No. 41. Petitioner did not file a reply thereafter. I have reviewed the billing records submitted with Petitioner’s request and find a reduction in the amount of fees and costs to be awarded appropriate, for the reasons stated below. ANALYSIS The Vaccine Act permits an award of reasonable attorney’s fees and costs for successful claimants. Section 15(e). Counsel must submit fee requests that include contemporaneous and specific billing records indicating the service performed, the number of hours expended on the service, and the name of the person performing the service. See Savin v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 85 Fed. Cl. 313, 316-18 (2008). Counsel should not include in their fee requests hours that are “excessive, redundant, or otherwise unnecessary.” Saxton v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 3 F.3d 1517, 1521 (Fed. Cir. 1993) (quoting Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424, 434 (1983)). It is “well within the special master’s discretion to reduce the hours to a number that, in [her] experience and judgment, [is] reasonable for the work done.” Id. at 1522. Furthermore, the special master may reduce a fee request sua sponte, apart from objections raised by respondent and without providing a petitioner notice and opportunity to respond. See Sabella v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 86 Fed. Cl. 201, 209 (2009). A special master need not engage in a line-by-line analysis of petitioner’s fee application when reducing fees. Broekelschen v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 102 Fed. Cl. 719, 729 (2011). The petitioner “bears the burden of establishing the hours expended, the rates charged, and the expenses incurred.” Wasson v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 24 Cl. Ct. 482, 484 (1991). The Petitioner “should present adequate proof [of the attorney’s fees and costs sought] at the time of the submission.” Wasson, 24 Cl. Ct. at 484 n.1. Petitioner’s counsel “should make a good faith effort to exclude from a fee request hours that are excessive, redundant, or otherwise unnecessary, just as a lawyer in private 2 practice ethically is obligated to exclude such hours from his fee submission.” Hensley, 461 U.S. at 434. ATTORNEY FEES A. Attorney Hourly Rates Petitioner requests hourly rates for attorneys performing work in this matter as follows: 2020 2021 2022 2023 Daniel A. Singer, Esq. X $445 $458 $482 Diane M. Plantz, Esq. X $266 X X Paralegals X $172 $177 $186 The requested paralegal rates are reasonable and consistent with prior determinations and will therefore be awarded herein. The rates requested for Attorneys Singer and Plantz, however, require adjustment. Attorney Singer was previously awarded hourly rates ($370 for 2021 and $385 for 2022) lower than what is being requested herein. Attorney Plantz was also previously awarded the lesser rate of $172 for time billed in 2021. See Goode v. Sec’y of Health & Hum. Servs., No. 20-0985 Slip Op, 55 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Apr. 28, 2023). Retroactive rate increases are not permitted in the Vaccine Program. See, e.g. Ramirez v. Sec'y of Health & Hum. Servs., No. 16-1180V, 2019 WL 948385, at *2 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Jan. 30, 2019) (noting that counsel “should only submit billing logs that reflect the hourly rate previously awarded to him.”). I find no reason to deviate from these previously established rates, and therefore reduce the 2021-22 rates to be consistent with Goode. For time billed in 2023, I find it reasonable to award Attorney Singer the hourly rate of $410, representing an increase of $25 from his 2022 approved rate (but still less than requested herein). Application of the foregoing reduces the amount of fees to be awarded herein by $2,807.60. 3 3 This amount consists of: ($445 - $370 = $75 x 0.50 hrs) + ($458 - $385 = $73 x 3.50 hrs) + ($482 - $410 = $72 x 7.90 hrs) + ($266 - $172 = $94 x 20.70 hrs) = $2,807.60 3 ATTORNEY COSTS Petitioner requests $2,968.53 in overall costs. ECF No. 40-1 at 12. This amount is comprised of obtaining medical records, shipping costs and the Court’s filing fee. But with the exception of the filing fee totaling $402.00, I find that Petitioner has not provided sufficient supporting documentation to substantiate the remainder $2,566.53 in costs requested herein. Per the Guidelines for Practice Under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (the “Guidelines”), “[b]efore reimbursement of costs will be made, sufficient supporting documentation, such as invoices, receipts, and billing statements, must be provided.”. See Guidelines for Practice Under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program at 71. 4 When Petitioners fail to provide appropriate documentation to substantiate a requested cost, special masters have refrained from awarding the relevant sum. See, e.g., Gardner-Cook v. Sec’y of Health & Hum. Servs., No. 99-480V, 2005 WL 6122520, at *4 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. June 30, 2005). Thus, I disallow reimbursement of the unsubstantiated costs, reducing the total amount of litigation costs to be awarded by $2,566.53. CONCLUSION The Vaccine Act permits an award of reasonable attorney’s fees and costs for successful claimants. Section 15(e). Accordingly, I hereby GRANT Petitioner’s Motion for attorney’s fees and costs. I award a total of $21,945.00 (representing $21,543.00 in fees plus $402.00 in costs) as a lump sum in the form of a check jointly payable to Petitioner and Petitioner’s counsel, Daniel A. Singer. In the absence of a timely-filed motion for review (see Appendix B to the Rules of the Court), the Clerk of Court shall enter judgment in accordance with this Decision. 5 IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Brian H. Corcoran Brian H. Corcoran Chief Special Master 4 The guidelines for Practice Under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program can be f ound at: https://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/Guidelines-4.24.2020.pdf 5 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties may expedite entry of judgment by f iling a joint notice renouncing their right to seek review. 4