VICP Registry Case Source Bundle Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_22-vv-01526 Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_22-vv-01526 Petitioner: Billy Edwin Walden Filed: 2022-10-17 Decided: 2024-01-17 Vaccine: influenza Vaccination date: 2020-10-21 Condition: Guillain Barré syndrome Outcome: compensated Award amount USD: 350000 AI-assisted case summary: On October 17, 2022, Thellys Ann Walden, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Billy Edwin Walden, filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. The petition alleged that Billy Edwin Walden received an influenza vaccine on October 21, 2020, and subsequently developed Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS), which resulted in his death on November 2, 2020. The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, filed a Rule 4(c) report on September 22, 2023, conceding that the petitioner satisfied the criteria set forth in the Vaccine Injury Table for GBS and that Mr. Walden's death was a sequela of the vaccine injury. On September 25, 2023, Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran issued a ruling on entitlement, finding the petitioner entitled to compensation. Subsequently, on December 12, 2023, the respondent filed a proffer on the award of compensation, proposing an award of $350,000.00. This amount was comprised of $250,000.00 for the statutory benefit for a vaccine-related death and $100,000.00 for past pain and suffering. The petitioner agreed with the proffered award. On January 17, 2024, Chief Special Master Corcoran issued a decision awarding the petitioner a lump sum payment of $350,000.00, payable by check to Thellys Ann Walden, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Billy Edwin Walden. The award represents compensation for all damages available under Section 15(a) of the Vaccine Act. The public decision does not describe the specific onset of symptoms, medical tests performed, or treatments received by Mr. Walden. Petitioner's counsel was Frank Stout of Stout Law Office, and respondent's counsel was Colleen Clemons Hartley of the U.S. Department of Justice. Theory of causation field: Petitioner alleged that Billy Edwin Walden received an influenza vaccine on October 21, 2020, and subsequently developed Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS), a condition listed on the Vaccine Injury Table, which resulted in his death on November 2, 2020. The respondent conceded that Mr. Walden's GBS met the Vaccine Injury Table criteria and that his death was a sequela of the vaccine injury. The case was decided based on the respondent's concession and the Vaccine Injury Table. No specific medical experts or detailed causation theories beyond the Table criteria were described in the public text. The award was stipulated to be $350,000.00, consisting of $250,000.00 for the statutory benefit for a vaccine-related death and $100,000.00 for past pain and suffering. The ruling on entitlement was issued on September 25, 2023, and the final decision awarding damages was issued on January 17, 2024, by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. Petitioner was represented by Frank Stout, and respondent was represented by Colleen Clemons Hartley. Public staged source text: ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_22-vv-01526-0 Date issued/filed: 2023-10-27 Pages: 2 Docket text: PUBLIC ORDER/RULING (Originally filed: 09/25/2023) regarding 27 Ruling on Entitlement. Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. (kle) Service on parties made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:22-vv-01526-UNJ Document 30 Filed 10/27/23 Page 1 of 2 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 22-1526V THELLYS ANN WALDEN, Personal Chief Special Master Corcoran Representative of ESTATE OF BILLY EDWIN WALDEN, Filed: September 25, 2023 Petitioner, v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Frank Stout, Stout Law Office, Ada, OK, for Petitioner. Colleen Clemons Hartley, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1 On October 17, 2022, Thellys Ann Walden, Personal Representative of the Estate of Billy Edwin Walden deceased (“Petitioner”) 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 Billy Edwin Walden (“Mr. Walden”) suffered Guillain Barré syndrome (“GBS”), and ultimately, his death, as a result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccine administered on October 21, 2020. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters. 1 Because this Ruling 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 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 (2018). Case 1:22-vv-01526-UNJ Document 30 Filed 10/27/23 Page 2 of 2 On September 22, 2023, 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. Specifically, Respondent has concluded that “[P]etitioner on behalf of Mr. Walden has satisfied the criteria set forth in the Vaccine Injury Table . . . and the Qualifications and Aids to Interpretation.” Id. at 3. Respondent further agrees that “Mr. Walden’s records show that the sequela of his injury resulted in his death on November 2, 2020.” 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_22-vv-01526-1 Date issued/filed: 2024-01-17 Pages: 5 Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 12/14/2023) regarding 34 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer ( Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. )(mpj) Service on parties made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:22-vv-01526-UNJ Document 36 Filed 01/17/24 Page 1 of 5 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 22-1526V THELLYS ANN WALDEN, Personal Chief Special Master Corcoran Representative of ESTATE OF BILLY EDWIN WALDEN, Filed: December 14, 2023 Petitioner, v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Frank Stout, Stout Law Office, Ada, OK, for Petitioner. Colleen Clemons Hartley, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1 On October 17, 2022, Thellys Ann Walden, Personal Representative of the Estate of Billy Edwin Walden deceased (“Petitioner”) 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 Billy Edwin Walden (“Mr. Walden”) suffered Guillain Barré syndrome (“GBS”), and ultimately, his death, as a result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccine administered on October 21, 2020. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters. 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 (2018). Case 1:22-vv-01526-UNJ Document 36 Filed 01/17/24 Page 2 of 5 On September 25, 2023, a ruling on entitlement was issued, finding Petitioner entitled to compensation. On December 12, 2023, Respondent filed a proffer on award of compensation (“Proffer”) indicating Petitioner should be awarded $350,000.00 (comprised of $250,000.00 for the statutory benefit for a vaccine-related death, and $100,000.00 for past pain and suffering). Proffer at 2. In the Proffer, Respondent represented that Petitioner 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 $350,000.00 (comprised of $250,000.00 for the statutory benefit for a vaccine-related death, and $100,000.00 for past pain and suffering) 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 1:22-vv-01526-UNJ Document 36 Filed 01/17/24 Page 3 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS ************************************* THELLYS ANN WALDEN, Personal * Representative of the Estate of BILLY * EDWIN WALDEN, * Petitioner, * No. 22-1526V * Chief Special Master Corcoran v. * * SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND * HUMAN SERVICES, * * Respondent. * ************************************* RESPONDENT’S PROFFER ON AWARD OF COMPENSATION On October 17, 2022, Thellys Ann Walden, as personal representative of the Estate of Billy Edwin Walden,1 filed a petition stating that Billy Edwin Walden developed Guillain-Barré syndrome (“GBS”), a Vaccine Table Injury, within the Table time frame following administration of a flu vaccine on October 21, 2020. Petitioner also alleged that Billy Edwin Walden’s death is a sequela of his GBS. On September 22, 2023, respondent filed a Rule 4(c) Report, conceding that petitioner’s claim meets the Table criteria for a GBS injury, and that Billy Edwin Walden’s death is vaccine related. ECF No. 26. On September 25, 2023, the Court issued a Ruling on Entitlement finding petitioner entitled to compensation under the Vaccine Act. ECF No. 27. 1 Petitioner filed documentation on October 17, 2022, establishing that on March 14, 2022, she was appointed personal representative of Billy Edwin Walden’s Estate under the laws of the State of Oklahoma. See Exhibit 1. All references to petitioner herein refer solely to Thellys Ann Walden in her representative capacity as the personal representative of the Estate of Billy Edwin Walden. Case 1:22-vv-01526-UNJ Document 36 Filed 01/17/24 Page 4 of 5 I. Items of Compensation Based upon the evidence of record, respondent proffers that petitioner should be awarded the following, and requests that the Chief Special Master’s decision and the Court’s judgment award: a. a lump sum payment of $250,000.00, which represents compensation for the statutory benefit for a vaccine-related death, and b. a lump sum payment of $100,000.00, which represents compensation for past pain and suffering. These amounts represent all elements of compensation to which petitioner would be entitled under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a)(2) and (a)(4).2 Petitioner agrees. II. Form of the Award Respondent recommends that petitioner be awarded a lump sum payment of $350,000.00, in the form of a check payable to petitioner, Thellys Ann Walden, as personal representative of the Estate of Billy Edwin Walden.3 Petitioner agrees. Respectfully submitted, BRIAN M. BOYNTON Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General C. SALVATORE D’ALESSIO Director Torts Branch, Civil Division 2 This Proffer does not include attorneys’ fees and costs, which the parties intend to address after a Damages Decision is issued. 3 If for some reason petitioner is not authorized by a court of competent jurisdiction to serve as the personal representative of the Estate of Billy Edwin Walden at the time a payment pursuant to this Proffer is to be made, then any such payment shall be paid to the party or parties appointed by a court of competent jurisdiction to serve as personal representative of the Estate of Billy Edwin Walden upon submission of written documentation of such appointment to the Secretary. 2 Case 1:22-vv-01526-UNJ Document 36 Filed 01/17/24 Page 5 of 5 HEATHER L. PEARLMAN Deputy Director Torts Branch, Civil Division TRACI R. PATTON Assistant Director Torts Branch, Civil Division /s/ COLLEEN C. HARTLEY COLLEEN C. HARTLEY Assistant Director Torts Branch, Civil Division U.S. Department of Justice P.O. Box 146 Benjamin Franklin Station Washington, D.C. 20044-0146 Phone: (202) 616-3644 Dated: December 12, 2023 3 ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 3: USCOURTS-cofc-1_22-vv-01526-cl-extra-10736433 Date issued/filed: 2024-01-17 Pages: 1 Docket text: Supplementary opinion from CourtListener cluster 10269843 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 22-1526V THELLYS ANN WALDEN, Personal Chief Special Master Corcoran Representative of ESTATE OF BILLY EDWIN WALDEN, Filed: December 14, 2023 Petitioner, v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Frank Stout, Stout Law Office, Ada, OK, for Petitioner. Colleen Clemons Hartley, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1 On October 17, 2022, Thellys Ann Walden, Personal Representative of the Estate of Billy Edwin Walden deceased (“Petitioner”) 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 Billy Edwin Walden (“Mr. Walden”) suffered Guillain Barré syndrome (“GBS”), and ultimately, his death, as a result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccine administered on October 21, 2020. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters. 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 (2018). On September 25, 2023, a ruling on entitlement was issued, finding Petitioner entitled to compensation. On December 12, 2023, Respondent filed a proffer on award of compensation (“Proffer”) indicating Petitioner should be awarded $350,000.00 (comprised of $250,000.00 for the statutory benefit for a vaccine-related death, and $100,000.00 for past pain and suffering). Proffer at 2. In the Proffer, Respondent represented that Petitioner 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 $350,000.00 (comprised of $250,000.00 for the statutory benefit for a vaccine-related death, and $100,000.00 for past pain and suffering) 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 ************************************* THELLYS ANN WALDEN, Personal * Representative of the Estate of BILLY * EDWIN WALDEN, * Petitioner, * No. 22-1526V * Chief Special Master Corcoran v. * * SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND * HUMAN SERVICES, * * Respondent. * ************************************* RESPONDENT’S PROFFER ON AWARD OF COMPENSATION On October 17, 2022, Thellys Ann Walden, as personal representative of the Estate of Billy Edwin Walden, 1 filed a petition stating that Billy Edwin Walden developed Guillain-Barré syndrome (“GBS”), a Vaccine Table Injury, within the Table time frame following administration of a flu vaccine on October 21, 2020. Petitioner also alleged that Billy Edwin Walden’s death is a sequela of his GBS. On September 22, 2023, respondent filed a Rule 4(c) Report, conceding that petitioner’s claim meets the Table criteria for a GBS injury, and that Billy Edwin Walden’s death is vaccine related. ECF No. 26. On September 25, 2023, the Court issued a Ruling on Entitlement finding petitioner entitled to compensation under the Vaccine Act. ECF No. 27. 1 Petitioner filed documentation on October 17, 2022, establishing that on March 14, 2022, she was appointed personal representative of Billy Edwin Walden’s Estate under the laws of the State of Oklahoma. See Exhibit 1. All references to petitioner herein refer solely to Thellys Ann Walden in her representative capacity as the personal representative of the Estate of Billy Edwin Walden. I. Items of Compensation Based upon the evidence of record, respondent proffers that petitioner should be awarded the following, and requests that the Chief Special Master’s decision and the Court’s judgment award: a. a lump sum payment of $250,000.00, which represents compensation for the statutory benefit for a vaccine-related death, and b. a lump sum payment of $100,000.00, which represents compensation for past pain and suffering. These amounts represent all elements of compensation to which petitioner would be entitled under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a)(2) and (a)(4). 2 Petitioner agrees. II. Form of the Award Respondent recommends that petitioner be awarded a lump sum payment of $350,000.00, in the form of a check payable to petitioner, Thellys Ann Walden, as personal representative of the Estate of Billy Edwin Walden. 3 Petitioner agrees. Respectfully submitted, BRIAN M. BOYNTON Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General C. SALVATORE D’ALESSIO Director Torts Branch, Civil Division 2 This Proffer does not include attorneys’ fees and costs, which the parties intend to address after a Damages Decision is issued. 3 If for some reason petitioner is not authorized by a court of competent jurisdiction to serve as the personal representative of the Estate of Billy Edwin Walden at the time a payment pursuant to this Proffer is to be made, then any such payment shall be paid to the party or parties appointed by a court of competent jurisdiction to serve as personal representative of the Estate of Billy Edwin Walden upon submission of written documentation of such appointment to the Secretary. 2 HEATHER L. PEARLMAN Deputy Director Torts Branch, Civil Division TRACI R. PATTON Assistant Director Torts Branch, Civil Division /s/ COLLEEN C. HARTLEY COLLEEN C. HARTLEY Assistant Director Torts Branch, Civil Division U.S. Department of Justice P.O. Box 146 Benjamin Franklin Station Washington, D.C. 20044-0146 Phone: (202) 616-3644 Dated: December 12, 2023 3 ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 4: USCOURTS-cofc-1_22-vv-01526-cl-extra-10820498 Date issued/filed: 2025-03-10 Pages: 1 Docket text: Supplementary opinion from CourtListener cluster 10353910 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CORRECTED In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 22-1526V THELLYS ANN WALDEN, personal Representative of ESTATE OF Chief Special Master Corcoran BILLY EDWIN WALDEN, Filed: February 7, 2025 Petitioner, v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Frank Stout, Stout Law Office, Ada, Ok, for Petitioner. Colleen Clemons Hartley, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION ON ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS 1 On October 17, 2022, Thellys Ann Walden, Personal Representative of the Estate of Billy Edwin Walden, deceased, 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 Billy Edwin Walden suffered Guillain Barré syndrome, and ultimately his death, as a result of an influenza vaccine administered on October 21, 2020. 1Because 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 (2018). Petition at 1. On December 14, 2023, I issued a decision awarding compensation to Petitioner based on the Respondent’s proffer. ECF No. 34. Petitioner has now filed a motion for attorney’s fees and costs, requesting an award of $56,809.47(representing $55,195.00 in fees plus $1,614.47 in costs). First Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs (“Motion”) filed July 11, 2024, ECF No. 38. Furthermore, counsel for Petitioner represents that Petitioner incurred no personal out-of-pocket expenses. ECF No. 38-3. Respondent reacted to the motion on July 11, 2024, representing that he is satisfied the statutory requirements for an award of attorneys’ fees and costs are met in this case but deferring resolution of the amount to be awarded to my discretion. Motion at 2-3, ECF No. 39. Petitioner did not file a reply thereafter. I have reviewed the billing records submitted with Petitioner’s requests and find a minor reduction in the amount of fees to be awarded appropriate, for the reasons listed 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. 2 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 practice ethically is obligated to exclude such hours from his fee submission.” Hensley, 461 U.S. at 434. ATTORNEY FEES 1. Hourly Rates Petitioner requests the rate of $475.00 per hour for all time billed by attorney Frank Stout from 2021-24. Mr. Stout has been a licensed attorney since 1988, with experience in mostly criminal and some civil matters in Ada, Oklahoma. Motion, Ex. 4. The requested rates are all within the Vaccine Program’s published range for attorneys at his level of overall experience, albeit on the highest end of the range. But Mr. Stout does not have demonstrated Vaccine Act experience, with this matter being his first case (and only case to date) in the Program. It is therefore improper for Mr. Stout to receive rates established for comparably experienced counsel who also have lengthy experience in the Program. McCulloch, 2015 WL 5634323, at *17. Based on my experience applying the factors relevant to determining proper hourly rates for Program attorneys I find the rates of $400 per hour for 2021, $425 per hour for 2022, and $450 per hour for 2023 to be more appropriate for Mr. Powell. The rate of $475 per hour for time billed in 2024 shall be awarded. Application of these rates reduces the amount to be awarded herein by $4,780.00. 2. Paralegal Tasks In some instances, Mr. Stout has charged attorney rates for tasks considered to be more paralegal in nature. But in the Program, although attorneys may be compensated for paralegal-level work, they may only charge a rate that is comparable to what would be paid for a paralegal. 3 See, e.g. Doe/11 v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., No. XX-XXXV, 2010 WL 529425, at *9-10 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Jan. 29, 2010) (citing Missouri v. Jenkins, 491 U.S. 274, 288 (1989)); Mostovoy v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., No. 02-10V, 2016 WL 720969, at *5 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Feb. 4, 2016); Riggins. v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 99-382V, 2009 WL 3319818, at *20-21 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. June 15, 2009); Turpin v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., No. 99-535, 2008 WL 5747914, at *5- 3 These tasks are for multiple entries regarding requesting medical records, scanning, uploading and filing documents. A total of 15 hours of time billed on the following dates: 04/01/2022; 06/05/2022; 10/17/2022; 12/07/2022; 12/08/2022; and 12/19/2022. ECF No. 38 – 1 at 1. 3 7 Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Dec. 23, 2008). I therefore reduce his rate for such work to $160 per hour for the entries considered to be paralegal tasks. This further reduces the fees to be awarded by $3,900.00. 3. Excessive Billing Special Masters have previously reduced fees for work attributable to excessive and duplicative billing. See Ericzon v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., No. 10-103V, 2016 WL 447770 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Jan. 15, 2016) (reduced overall fee award by ten percent due to excessive and duplicative billing); Raymo v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., No. 11-65V, 2016 WL 7212323 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Nov. 2, 2016) (reduced overall fee award by 20 percent), mot. for rev. denied, 129 Fed. Cl. 691 (2016). Invoices show that Mr. Stout billed excessively for review of Court filings. For example, Mr. Stout billed 1.2 hours to review a two-paragraph status report filed on June 8, 2023, and also billed 2.5 hours to prepare and file a one-page (consisting of a total of three sentences) status report on November 27, 2023. ECF No. 38 – 1. 4 In addition, bills submitted in comparable Vaccine Program cases have sought considerably less for the same work performed. See Allen v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., No. 18-0693V, 2020 WL 1670708, (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. March 4, 2020) (billing a total of 119 hours from July 2017 – February 2020); Kirkpatrick v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., No. 18-1271V, 2020 WL 1866855 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. March 10, 2020) (billing a total of 133 hours from January 2017 – January 2020) and Barrera v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., No. 18-1304V, 2020 WL 1486803, (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. February 12, 2020) (billing a total of 59.6 hours from January 2017 – February 2020). The excessive time devoted to this matter likely reflects counsel’s inexperience in the Vaccine Program, but is not properly compensated in full. In evaluating a motion for attorney’s fees and costs, special masters “need not, and indeed should not, become green-eyeshade accountants.”. Fox v. Vice, 563 U.S. 826, 838, 131 S.Ct. 2205, 180 L.Ed.2d 45 (2011). I hereby reduce the request for attorney fees by a total of 10 percent. This results in an additional reduction of $4,651.50. 5 4 Entries that have time considered to be excessive are as follows; 06/08/23 (1.20hrs); 06/14/23 (0.80hrs); 07/24/23 (1.30hrs); 08/09/23 (0.70hrs); 09/08/23 (2.50hrs); 09/22/23 (1.50 hrs); 10/27/23 (0.50hrs); 11/27/23 (2.50hrs); 12/08/23 (0.90hrs); 12/12/23 (1.0hrs); and 01/17/23 (1.70hrs). 5 This amount consists of 10 percent of the overall total after application of hourly rate reductions. ($46,515 x .10 = $4,651.50). 4 ATTORNEY COSTS Petitioner has provided sufficient supporting documentation for all claimed costs. ECF No. 38-2. Respondent offered no specific objection to the rates or amounts sought. I find the requested costs reasonable and hereby award them in full. The Vaccine Act permits an award of reasonable attorney’s fees and costs for successful claimants. Section 15(e). Accordingly, I hereby GRANT in part, Petitioner’s Motion for attorney’s fees and costs. Petitioner is awarded attorneys’ fees and costs in the total amount of $43,477.97 (representing $41,863.50 in fees plus $1,614.47 in costs) to be paid through an ACH deposit to Petitioner’s counsel’s IOLTA account for prompt disbursement. 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. 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Brian H. Corcoran Brian H. Corcoran Chief Special Master 6 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties may expedite entry of judgment by filing a joint notice renouncing their right to seek review. 5