VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_22-vv-00316
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_22-vv-00316
Petitioner: Jack Ciunci
Filed: 2022-03-23
Decided: 2026-02-26
Vaccine: HPV
Vaccination date: 2019-04-01
Condition: optic neuritis and a significant aggravation of an underlying condition, specifically myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein antibody disease (“MOGAD”)
Outcome: dismissed
Award amount USD: 

AI-assisted case summary:
Jack Ciunci received an HPV vaccination on April 1, 2019, which he alleged caused optic neuritis and a significant aggravation of his underlying condition, MOGAD. He filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program on March 23, 2022. After a status conference, Mr. Ciunci filed a motion to dismiss his petition on January 21, 2025, which was granted on February 12, 2025. Subsequently, on August 20, 2025, Mr. Ciunci filed a motion for attorneys' fees and costs, seeking $31,324.15. The respondent did not contest that the statutory requirements for an award of attorneys' fees and costs were met. The Special Master found that the case possessed both good faith and reasonable basis throughout its pendency, despite the eventual dismissal, and granted the motion, awarding the full amount requested for attorneys' fees and costs.

Theory of causation field:
unclear

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_22-vv-00316-0
Date issued/filed: 2026-04-10
Pages: 4
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 02/26/2026) regarding 55 DECISION of Special Master - Fees. Signed by Special Master Thomas L. Gowen. (kp) Service on parties made.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:22-vv-00316-UNJ Document 58 Filed 04/10/26 Page 1 of 4
CORRECTED
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
Filed: February 26, 2026
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
JACK CIUNCI, *
*
Petitioner, * No. 22-316V
*
v. * Special Master Gowen
*
SECRETARY OF HEALTH *
AND HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
Respondent. *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Ronald Craig Homer, Conway, Homer, P.C., Boston, MA, for Petitioner.
Traci R. Patton, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
DECISION ON ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS1
On August 20, 2025, Jack Ciunci, (“Petitioner”) filed a motion for attorneys’ fees and costs.
Petitioner’s Motion for Attorney Fees (“Fees App.”) (ECF No. 52). For the reasons discussed
below, I GRANT Petitioner’s motion for attorneys’ fees and costs and award a total of $31,324.15.
I. Procedural History
On March 23, 2022, Petitioner filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine
Injury Compensation Program.2 Petition (ECF No. 1). Petitioner alleged that the human
papillomavirus (“HPV”) vaccination he received on April 1, 2019, caused an episode of optic
neuritis and a significant aggravation of an underlying condition, specifically myelin
oligodendrocyte glycoprotein antibody disease (“MOGAD”). Petition; Amended Petition (ECF No.
39). On January 21, 2025, after a status conference, Petitioner filed a motion dismissing his petition.
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 National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program is set forth in Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine Act of
1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755, codified as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-10 to -34 (2018) (Vaccine Act or
the Act. All citations in this decision to individual sections of the Vaccine Act are to 42 U.S.C.A. § 300aa.

Case 1:22-vv-00316-UNJ Document 58 Filed 04/10/26 Page 2 of 4
(ECF No. 47). On February 12, 2025, I granted Petitioner’s motion and dismissed the petition. (ECF
No. 48).
On August 20, 2025, Petitioner filed a motion for attorneys’ fees and costs. Fees App. at
1. Petitioner requests compensation in the total amount of $31,324.15, representing $30,276.90 in
attorneys’ fees and $1,047.25 in costs. Id. Pursuant to General Order No. 9, Petitioner warrants he
has not personally incurred any costs in pursuit of his claim. (ECF No. 53). Respondent reacted to
the fees motion on August 28, 2025, stating that “Respondent is satisfied the statutory requirements
for an award of attorneys’ fees and costs are met in this case.” Response at 2 (ECF No. 54).
Petitioner did not file a reply thereafter.
The matter is now ripe for adjudication.
II. Analysis
Under the Vaccine Act, the special master may award reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs
for a petition that does not result in an award of compensation but was filed in good faith and
supported by a reasonable basis. § 300aa–15(e)(1). In this case, although the petition was
eventually dismissed, I am satisfied that the case possessed both good faith and reasonable basis
throughout its pendency. Respondent also has not advanced any argument that the claim lacked
good faith or reasonable basis. Accordingly, Petitioner is entitled to a final award of reasonable
attorneys’ fees and costs.
Petitioners “bea[r] the burden of establishing the hours expended, the rates charged, and
the expenses incurred” are reasonable. Wasson v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 24 Cl. Ct. 482,
484 (1993). Adequate proof of the claimed fees and costs should be presented when the motion is
filed. Id. at 484 n. 1. The special master has the discretion to reduce awards sua sponte, independent
of enumerated objections from the respondent. Sabella v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 86 Fed.
Cl. 201, 208–09 (Fed. Cl. 2009); Savin v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 85 Fed. Cl. 313 (Fed.
Cl. 2008), aff'd No. 99–537V, 2008 WL 2066611 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Apr. 22, 2008).
a. Attorneys’ Fees
A “reasonable hourly rate” is defined as the rate “prevailing in the community for similar
services by lawyers of reasonably comparable skill, experience and reputation.” Avera, 515 F.3d
at 1348 (quoting Blum, 465 U.S. at 896 n.11). In general, this rate is based on “the forum rate for
the District of Columbia” rather than “the rate in the geographic area of the practice of Petitioner's
attorney.” Rodriguez v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 632 F.3d 1381, 1384 (Fed. Cir. 2011)
(citing Avera, 515 F. 3d at 1349). There is a “limited exception” that provides for attorneys’ fees
to be awarded at local hourly rates when “the bulk of the attorney's work is done outside the forum
jurisdiction” and “there is a very significant difference” between the local hourly rate and forum
hourly rate. Id. This is known as the Davis County exception. Hall v. Sec'y of Health & Human
Servs., 640 F.3d 1351, 1353 (2011) (citing Davis Cty. Solid Waste Mgmt. & Energy Recovery
Special Serv. Dist. v. U.S. EPA, 169 F.3d 755, 758 (D.C. Cir. 1999)).
For cases in which forum rates apply, McCulloch provides a framework for consideration
of appropriate ranges for attorneys’ fees based upon the experience of the practicing attorney.
McCulloch v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., No 09-293V, 2015 WL 5634323, at *19 (Fed. Cl.
2

Case 1:22-vv-00316-UNJ Document 58 Filed 04/10/26 Page 3 of 4
Spec. Mstr. Sept. 1, 2015) motion for recons. denied, 2015 WL 6181910 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr.
Sept. 21, 2015). The Court has since updated the McCulloch rates, and the Attorneys’ Forum
Hourly Rate Fee Schedules for 2015-2016 and from 2017-2022, which can be accessed online.
Petitioner requests the following rates of compensation for his attorneys at Conway Homer,
P.C.:
2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Ronald Homer - $475 $500 $525 $567
Christina Ciampolilo $380 $425 $470 $500 $537
Joseph Pepper - $415 - - $516
Lauren Faga - $385 - - -
Meridith Daniels $350 - $455 $485 $516
Nathaniel Enos - - - $360 -
Patrick Kelly - - $305 $345 $380
Paralegal $155 $170 $185 $195 $207
These rates are consistent with what counsel and staff have previously been awarded for their
Vaccine Program work and I find them to be reasonable herein.
Turning next to review of the submitted billing statement, I find that the overall hours spent
on this matter appear to be reasonable. The entries are reasonable and accurately describe the work
being performed and the length of time it took to perform each task. Respondent has not identified
any particular entries as being objectionable. Therefore, Petitioner is entitled to final attorneys’
fees of $30,276.90.
b. Attorneys’ Costs
Like attorneys’ fees, a request for reimbursement of costs must be reasonable. Perreira v.
Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 27 Fed. Cl. 29, 34 (Fed. Cl. 1992). Petitioner requests attorneys’
costs in the amount of $1,047.25. This amount is comprised of acquiring medical records, postage,
the Court’s filing fee, and copies. Fees App. Tab A at 18; see also Tab B. Petitioner has provided
adequate documentation supporting all of her requested costs and all expenses appear to be
reasonable and necessary for the presentation of the case. Petitioner is therefore awarded the full
amount of costs sought.
III. Conclusion
In accordance with the foregoing, I hereby GRANT Petitioner’s motion for attorneys’ fees
and costs and find that Petitioner is entitled to a reimbursement of attorneys’ fees and costs as
follows:
Attorneys’ Fees Requested $30,276.90
(Reduction of Fees) -
Total Attorneys’ Fees Awarded $30,276.90
3

Case 1:22-vv-00316-UNJ Document 58 Filed 04/10/26 Page 4 of 4
Attorneys’ Costs Requested $1,047.25
(Reduction of Costs) -
Total Attorneys’ Costs Awarded $1,047.25
Total Attorneys’ Fees and Costs $31,324.15
Accordingly, I award a lump sum in the amount of $31,324.15 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.
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.3
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/Thomas L. Gowen
Thomas L. Gowen
Special Master
3 Entry of judgment can be expedited by each party’s filing of a notice renouncing the right to seek review. Vaccine
Rule 11(a).
4