VICP Registry Case Source Bundle Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_22-vv-01714 Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_22-vv-01714 Petitioner: Susan Rogers Filed: 2022-11-18 Decided: 2025-02-14 Vaccine: Tdap Vaccination date: 2020-09-20 Condition: shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) Outcome: compensated Award amount USD: 85000 AI-assisted case summary: Susan Rogers filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, alleging that she suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) resulting from a tetanus diphtheria acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccine received on September 20, 2020. She alleged that the vaccine was administered in the United States, she suffered residual effects of her injury for more than six months, and no civil action had been filed for her injury. The respondent conceded that Petitioner is entitled to compensation, agreeing that her injury was consistent with SIRVA as defined by the Vaccine Injury Table. The respondent confirmed that Petitioner had no prior shoulder issues, the pain occurred within 48 hours after vaccination, was limited to the shoulder of administration, and no other condition explained the pain. The respondent also agreed that Petitioner suffered residual effects for more than six months and satisfied all legal prerequisites for compensation. A ruling on entitlement was issued on July 30, 2024, finding Petitioner entitled to compensation. Subsequently, on January 6, 2025, the respondent filed a proffer on award of compensation, recommending an award of $85,000.00 for pain and suffering, which Petitioner agreed to. The Chief Special Master issued a decision awarding Petitioner a lump sum payment of $85,000.00 for pain and suffering. Theory of causation field: Table Public staged source text: ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_22-vv-01714-0 Date issued/filed: 2024-09-04 Pages: 2 Docket text: PUBLIC ORDER/RULING (Originally filed: 07/30/2024) regarding 34 Ruling on Entitlement Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. (ppa) Service on parties made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:22-vv-01714-UNJ Document 37 Filed 09/04/24 Page 1 of 2 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 22-1714V SUSAN ROGERS, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: July 30, 2024 v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Richard Gage, Richard Gage, P.C. (WY), Cheyenne, WY, for Petitioner. Neil Bhargava, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1 On November 18, 2022, Susan Rogers 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 suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) resulting from a tetanus diphtheria acellular pertussis (“Tdap”) vaccine received on September 20, 2020. Petition at 1-2. Petitioner further alleges that the Tdap vaccine was administered in the United States, she suffered residual effects of her injury for more than six months, and neither Petitioner, nor anyone else to her knowledge, has filed, participated in, or collected an award or settlement from any civil action for her vaccine-related injury. Petition at ¶¶ 2, 7, 8. 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-01714-UNJ Document 37 Filed 09/04/24 Page 2 of 2 On July 30, 2024, 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 agrees that Petitioner’s alleged injury is consistent with SIRVA as defined by the Vaccine Injury Table in that “petitioner had no history of pain, inflammation, or dysfunction of her right shoulder prior to vaccination; pain occurred within 48 hours after receipt of an intramuscular vaccination; pain was limited to the shoulder in which the vaccine was administered; and no other condition or abnormality has been identified to explain petitioner’s shoulder pain.” Id. at 8. Respondent further agrees that the medical records demonstrate that Petitioner suffered the residual effects of her condition for more than six months and has satisfied all legal prerequisites for compensation under the Vaccine Act. 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-01714-cl-extra-10734317 Date issued/filed: 2024-09-04 Pages: 1 Docket text: Supplementary opinion from CourtListener cluster 10267727 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 22-1714V SUSAN ROGERS, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: July 30, 2024 v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Richard Gage, Richard Gage, P.C. (WY), Cheyenne, WY, for Petitioner. Neil Bhargava, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1 On November 18, 2022, Susan Rogers 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 suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) resulting from a tetanus diphtheria acellular pertussis (“Tdap”) vaccine received on September 20, 2020. Petition at 1-2. Petitioner further alleges that the Tdap vaccine was administered in the United States, she suffered residual effects of her injury for more than six months, and neither Petitioner, nor anyone else to her knowledge, has filed, participated in, or collected an award or settlement from any civil action for her vaccine-related injury. Petition at ¶¶ 2, 7, 8. 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). On July 30, 2024, 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 agrees that Petitioner’s alleged injury is consistent with SIRVA as defined by the Vaccine Injury Table in that “petitioner had no history of pain, inflammation, or dysfunction of her right shoulder prior to vaccination; pain occurred within 48 hours after receipt of an intramuscular vaccination; pain was limited to the shoulder in which the vaccine was administered; and no other condition or abnormality has been identified to explain petitioner’s shoulder pain.” Id. at 8. Respondent further agrees that the medical records demonstrate that Petitioner suffered the residual effects of her condition for more than six months and has satisfied all legal prerequisites for compensation under the Vaccine Act. 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 3: USCOURTS-cofc-1_22-vv-01714-1 Date issued/filed: 2025-02-14 Pages: 4 Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 01/13/2025) regarding 44 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer, Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. (ppa) Service on parties made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:22-vv-01714-UNJ Document 49 Filed 02/14/25 Page 1 of 4 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 22-1714V SUSAN ROGERS, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: January 13, 2025 v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Richard Gage, Richard Gage, P.C. (WY), Cheyenne, WY, for Petitioner. Neil Bhargava, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1 On November 18, 2022, Susan Rogers 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 suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) resulting from a tetanus diphtheria acellular pertussis (“Tdap”) vaccine received on September 20, 2020. Petition at 1-2. Petitioner further alleges that the Tdap vaccine was administered in the United States, she suffered residual effects of her injury for more than six months, and neither Petitioner, nor anyone else to her knowledge, has filed, participated in, or collected an award or settlement from any civil action for her vaccine-related injury. Petition at ¶¶ 2, 7, 8. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters. On July 30, 2024, a ruling on entitlement was issued, finding Petitioner entitled to compensation for SIRVA. On January 6, 2025, Respondent filed a proffer on award of 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-01714-UNJ Document 49 Filed 02/14/25 Page 2 of 4 compensation (“Proffer”) indicating Petitioner should be awarded $85,000.00. 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 $85,000.00 (in 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-01714-UNJ Document 49 Filed 02/14/25 Page 3 of 4 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS SUSAN ROGERS, Petitioner, No. 22-1714V v. Chief Special Master Corcoran ECF SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. RESPONDENT’S PROFFER ON AWARD OF COMPENSATION On November 18, 2022, Susan Rogers (“petitioner”) filed a petition for compensation under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 to -34 (“Vaccine Act” or “Act”), alleging that she suffered a Table shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”), as the result of the tetanus-diphtheria-acellular-pertussis (‘Tdap”) vaccine she received on September 20, 2020. Petition at 1. On July 30, 2024, the Secretary of Health and Human Services (“respondent”) filed a Rule 4(c) Report indicating that this case is appropriate for compensation under the terms of the Act for a SIRVA Table injury, and on the same date, the Chief Special Master issued a Ruling on Entitlement finding petitioner entitled to compensation. ECF Nos. 33, 34. I. Items of Compensation A. Pain and Suffering Respondent proffers that petitioner should be awarded $85,000.00 in pain and suffering. See 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a)(4). Petitioner agrees. 1 Case 1:22-vv-01714-UNJ Document 49 Filed 02/14/25 Page 4 of 4 II. Form of the Award Petitioner is a competent adult. Evidence of guardianship is not required in this case. Respondent recommends that the compensation provided to petitioner should be made through a lump sum payment as described below and requests that the Special Master’s decision and the Court’s judgment award the following1: A. A lump sum payment of $85,000.00, in the form of a check payable to petitioner. III. Summary of Recommended Payments Following Judgment A. Lump sum payable to petitioner, Susan Rogers. $85,000.00 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 JULIA M. COLLISON Assistant Director Torts Branch, Civil Division /s/ Neil Bhargava NEIL BHARGAVA Trial Attorney Torts Branch, Civil Division U.S. Department of Justice P.O. Box 146, Ben Franklin Station Washington, DC 20044-0146 Tel.: (202) 305-3989 Date: January 6, 2025 neil.bhargava@usdoj.gov 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, unreimbursed expenses, future lost earnings and future pain and suffering. 2 ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 4: USCOURTS-cofc-1_22-vv-01714-cl-extra-10800327 Date issued/filed: 2025-02-14 Pages: 1 Docket text: Supplementary opinion from CourtListener cluster 10333739 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 22-1714V SUSAN ROGERS, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: January 13, 2025 v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Richard Gage, Richard Gage, P.C. (WY), Cheyenne, WY, for Petitioner. Neil Bhargava, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1 On November 18, 2022, Susan Rogers 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 suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) resulting from a tetanus diphtheria acellular pertussis (“Tdap”) vaccine received on September 20, 2020. Petition at 1-2. Petitioner further alleges that the Tdap vaccine was administered in the United States, she suffered residual effects of her injury for more than six months, and neither Petitioner, nor anyone else to her knowledge, has filed, participated in, or collected an award or settlement from any civil action for her vaccine-related injury. Petition at ¶¶ 2, 7, 8. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters. On July 30, 2024, a ruling on entitlement was issued, finding Petitioner entitled to compensation for SIRVA. On January 6, 2025, Respondent filed a proffer on award of 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). compensation (“Proffer”) indicating Petitioner should be awarded $85,000.00. 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 $85,000.00 (in 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 SUSAN ROGERS, Petitioner, v. No. 22-1714V Chief Special Master Corcoran SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND ECF HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. RESPONDENT’S PROFFER ON AWARD OF COMPENSATION On November 18, 2022, Susan Rogers (“petitioner”) filed a petition for compensation under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 to -34 (“Vaccine Act” or “Act”), alleging that she suffered a Table shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”), as the result of the tetanus-diphtheria-acellular-pertussis (‘Tdap”) vaccine she received on September 20, 2020. Petition at 1. On July 30, 2024, the Secretary of Health and Human Services (“respondent”) filed a Rule 4(c) Report indicating that this case is appropriate for compensation under the terms of the Act for a SIRVA Table injury, and on the same date, the Chief Special Master issued a Ruling on Entitlement finding petitioner entitled to compensation. ECF Nos. 33, 34. I. Items of Compensation A. Pain and Suffering Respondent proffers that petitioner should be awarded $85,000.00 in pain and suffering. See 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a)(4). Petitioner agrees. 1 II. Form of the Award Petitioner is a competent adult. Evidence of guardianship is not required in this case. Respondent recommends that the compensation provided to petitioner should be made through a lump sum payment as described below and requests that the Special Master’s decision and the Court’s judgment award the following1: A. A lump sum payment of $85,000.00, in the form of a check payable to petitioner. III. Summary of Recommended Payments Following Judgment A. Lump sum payable to petitioner, Susan Rogers. $85,000.00 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 JULIA M. COLLISON Assistant Director Torts Branch, Civil Division /s/ Neil Bhargava NEIL BHARGAVA Trial Attorney Torts Branch, Civil Division U.S. Department of Justice P.O. Box 146, Ben Franklin Station Washington, DC 20044-0146 Tel.: (202) 305-3989 Date: January 6, 2025 neil.bhargava@usdoj.gov 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, unreimbursed expenses, future lost earnings and future pain and suffering. 2 ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 5: USCOURTS-cofc-1_22-vv-01714-cl-extra-11082089 Date issued/filed: 2025-06-23 Pages: 1 Docket text: Supplementary opinion from CourtListener cluster 10615501 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 22-1714V SUSAN ROGERS, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, v. Filed: May 21, 2025 SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Richard Gage, Richard Gage, P.C. (WY), Cheyenne, WY, for Petitioner. Neil Bhargava, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION ON ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS 1 On November 18, 2022, Susan Rogers 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 suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration resulting from a tetanus diphtheria acellular pertussis vaccine received on September 20, 2020. Petition, ECF No. 1. On January 13, 2025, I issued a decision awarding compensation to Petitioner based on the Respondent’s proffer. ECF No. 44. 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 $14,200.30 (representing $12,961.20 in fees plus $1,239.10 in costs). Application for Fees and Costs (“Motion”) filed February 11, 2025, ECF No. 48. Furthermore, Petitioner filed a signed statement representing that Petitioner incurred $46.10 in personal out-of- pocket expenses. ECF No. 48 at 53-56. Respondent reacted to the motion on February 11, 2025, 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. 53. Petitioner filed a reply requesting an award of fees and costs as indicated in the Motion. ECF No. 54. I have reviewed the billing records submitted with Petitioner’s request. The rates requested for work performed through the end of 2024 are reasonable and consistent with our prior determinations and will therefore be adopted. Petitioner has also requested the hourly rates of $450 for 2025 work performed by attorneys Richard Gage and Kristen Blume. I find the proposed rates to be reasonable and adopt them herein. Furthermore, Petitioner has otherwise provided supporting documentation for all claimed costs. ECF No. 52-3. 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 Petitioner’s Motion for attorney’s fees and costs. I award a total of $14,246.40 (representing $12,961.20 in fees plus $1,239.10 in litigation costs, plus $46.10 representing Petitioner’s personally incurred 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. 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Brian H. Corcoran Brian H. Corcoran Chief Special Master 3 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. 2