VICP Registry Case Source Bundle Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_22-vv-01785 Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_22-vv-01785 Petitioner: Elva Janosik Filed: 2022-12-06 Decided: 2024-02-09 Vaccine: influenza Vaccination date: 2020-10-26 Condition: Guillain-Barré syndrome Outcome: compensated Award amount USD: 405000 AI-assisted case summary: On December 6, 2022, Daniel Janosik, as the personal representative of the estate of Elva Janosik, filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. The petition alleged that Elva Janosik received an influenza vaccine on October 26, 2020, subsequently developed Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS), and that her death on December 17, 2020, was vaccine-related. The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, filed a Rule 4(c) report on November 13, 2023, conceding that the claim met the Table criteria for a GBS injury and that Ms. Janosik's death was related to her GBS. The respondent stated that Petitioner was entitled to compensation as there was no alternative cause for Ms. Janosik's condition or death. On November 15, 2023, Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran issued a ruling on entitlement, finding Petitioner entitled to compensation. Subsequently, on January 3, 2024, the respondent filed a proffer on the award of compensation, which the petitioner agreed to. On February 9, 2024, Chief Special Master Corcoran issued a decision on damages, awarding a lump sum payment of $405,000.00. This award comprised $250,000.00 for the statutory benefit for a vaccine-related death and $155,000.00 for past pain and suffering. The award was made payable to Daniel Janosik, as personal representative of the Estate of Elva Janosik. Petitioner was represented by Ronald Craig Homer of Conway, Homer, P.C., and Respondent was represented by Kimberly Shubert Davey of the U.S. Department of Justice. The public decision does not describe the specific onset of symptoms, medical tests, treatments, or the mechanism of causation beyond its relation to GBS as a Table injury. Theory of causation field: Petitioner Daniel Janosik, as personal representative of the Estate of Elva Janosik, alleged that Elva Janosik developed Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) following an influenza vaccine administered on October 26, 2020, and that her subsequent death on December 17, 2020, was vaccine-related. The respondent conceded that the claim met the Vaccine Injury Table criteria for GBS and that the death was related to GBS, finding no alternative cause. Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran issued a ruling on entitlement finding Petitioner entitled to compensation. A subsequent decision on damages awarded a lump sum of $405,000.00, consisting of $250,000.00 for the statutory benefit for a vaccine-related death and $155,000.00 for past pain and suffering. The theory of causation relied on GBS being a Table injury for the flu vaccine. The public text does not detail specific medical experts, clinical findings, or the precise mechanism of GBS causation in this case beyond the Table presumption. Public staged source text: ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_22-vv-01785-0 Date issued/filed: 2023-12-18 Pages: 2 Docket text: PUBLIC ORDER/RULING (Originally filed: 11/15/2023) regarding 27 Ruling on Entitlement Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. (nh) Service on parties made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:22-vv-01785-UNJ Document 31 Filed 12/18/23 Page 1 of 2 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 22-1785V DANIEL JANOSIK, Legal Chief Special Master Corcoran Representative of the ESTATE of ELVA JANOSIK, Petitioner, v. Filed: November 15, 2023 SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Ronald Craig Homer, Conway, Homer, P.C., Boston, MA, for Petitioner. Kimberly Shubert Davey, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1 On December 6, 2022, Daniel Janosik (“Petitioner”), as legal representative of the estate of Elva Janosik, 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 Ms. Janosik developed Guillain-Barré syndrome (“GBS”) as the result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccine administered to her on October 26, 2020, and that her death on December 17, 2020, is vaccine-related. Petition at 1. 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 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-01785-UNJ Document 31 Filed 12/18/23 Page 2 of 2 On November 13, 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 states that this claim asserts that Ms. Janosik’s death is due to GBS, which is an injury contained in the Vaccine Injury Table for the flu vaccine, and her records establish the requirements set forth in the Qualifications and Aids to Interpretation (“QAI”) for a flu/GBS Table injury. Id. at 5 (citing 42 C.F.R. §§ 100.3(XIV)(D), (c)(15). Respondent further states that given that these requirements are satisfied, and there is no alternative cause that explains Ms. Janosik’s condition or death, Petitioner is entitled to compensation under the Vaccine Act. Id. at 6. 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-01785-cl-extra-10736710 Date issued/filed: 2023-12-18 Pages: 1 Docket text: Supplementary opinion from CourtListener cluster 10270120 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 22-1785V DANIEL JANOSIK, Legal Chief Special Master Corcoran Representative of the ESTATE of ELVA JANOSIK, Petitioner, v. Filed: November 15, 2023 SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Ronald Craig Homer, Conway, Homer, P.C., Boston, MA, for Petitioner. Kimberly Shubert Davey, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1 On December 6, 2022, Daniel Janosik (“Petitioner”), as legal representative of the estate of Elva Janosik, 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 Ms. Janosik developed Guillain-Barré syndrome (“GBS”) as the result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccine administered to her on October 26, 2020, and that her death on December 17, 2020, is vaccine-related. Petition at 1. 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 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 November 13, 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 states that this claim asserts that Ms. Janosik’s death is due to GBS, which is an injury contained in the Vaccine Injury Table for the flu vaccine, and her records establish the requirements set forth in the Qualifications and Aids to Interpretation (“QAI”) for a flu/GBS Table injury. Id. at 5 (citing 42 C.F.R. §§ 100.3(XIV)(D), (c)(15). Respondent further states that given that these requirements are satisfied, and there is no alternative cause that explains Ms. Janosik’s condition or death, Petitioner is entitled to compensation under the Vaccine Act. Id. at 6. 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-01785-1 Date issued/filed: 2024-02-09 Pages: 5 Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 01/04/2024) regarding 37 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. (nh) Service on parties made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:22-vv-01785-UNJ Document 41 Filed 02/09/24 Page 1 of 5 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 22-1785V DANIEL JANOSIK, Personal Chief Special Master Corcoran Representative of the Estate of ELVA JANOSIK, deceased, Petitioner, Filed: January 4, 2024 v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Ronald Craig Homer, Conway, Homer, P.C., Boston, MA, for Petitioner. Kimberly Shubert Davey, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION ON DAMAGES1 On December 6, 2022, Daniel Janosik (“Petitioner”), as personal representative of the estate of Elva Janosik, 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 Ms. Janosik developed Guillain-Barré syndrome (“GBS”) as the result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccine administered to her on October 26, 2020, and that her death on December 17, 2020, was vaccine-related. 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-01785-UNJ Document 41 Filed 02/09/24 Page 2 of 5 On November 15, 2023, a ruling on entitlement was issued, finding Petitioner entitled to compensation for GBS. On January 3, 2024, Respondent filed a proffer on award of compensation (“Proffer”). Respondent represented that Petitioner agrees with the proffered award. Id. at 2. 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 a lump sum payment of $405,000.00 (representing $250,000.00 for the statutory benefit for a vaccine-related death, and $155,000.00 for past pain and suffering) in the form of a check payable to Petitioner, Daniel Janosik, as personal representative of the Estate of Elva Janosik. 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-01785-UNJ Document 41 Filed 02/09/24 Page 3 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS ____________________________________ ) DANIEL JANOSIK, Personal ) Representative of the Estate of ) ELVA JANOSIK, deceased, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) No. 22-1785V v. ) Chief Special Master Corcoran (SPU) ) ECF SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND ) HUMAN SERVICES, ) ) Respondent. ) ____________________________________) RESPONDENT’S PROFFER ON AWARD OF COMPENSATION On December 6, 2022, Daniel Janosik, as personal representative of the Estate of Elva Janosik,1 filed a petition stating that Elva Janosik developed Guillain-Barré syndrome (“GBS”), a Vaccine Table Injury, within the Table time frame following administration of a flu vaccine on October 26, 2020. Petitioner also alleged that Elva Janosik’s death is a sequelae of her GBS. On November 13, 2023, respondent filed a Rule 4(c) Report, conceding that petitioner’s claim meets the Table criteria for a GBS injury, and that Elva Janosik’s death was related to her GBS. ECF No. 26. The Court subsequently issued a Ruling on Entitlement finding petitioner entitled to compensation under the Vaccine Act. ECF No. 27. 1 Petitioner filed documentation on January 2, 2024, establishing that on June 1, 2022, he was appointed personal representative of Elva Janosik’s Estate under the laws of the State of Tennessee. See Exhibit 16. All references to petitioner herein refer solely to Daniel Janosik in his representative capacity as the personal representative of the Estate of Elva Janosik. Case 1:22-vv-01785-UNJ Document 41 Filed 02/09/24 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 $155,000.00, 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), (a)(4), and (a)(1)(B).2 Petitioner agrees. II. Form of the Award Respondent recommends that petitioner be awarded a lump sum payment of $405,000.00, in the form of a check payable to petitioner, Daniel Janosik, as personal representative of the Estate of Elva Janosik.3 Petitioner agrees. 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 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 Elva Janosik 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 Elva Janosik upon submission of written documentation of such appointment to the Secretary. 2 Case 1:22-vv-01785-UNJ Document 41 Filed 02/09/24 Page 5 of 5 JULIA M. COLLISON Assistant Director Torts Branch, Civil Division /s/ Kimberly S. Davey KIMBERLY S. DAVEY Trial Attorney Torts Branch, Civil Division U.S. Department of Justice P.O. Box 146 Benjamin Franklin Station Washington, D.C. 20044-0146 Tel: (202) 307-1815 Kimberly.Davey@usdoj.gov Dated: January 3, 2024 3 ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 4: USCOURTS-cofc-1_22-vv-01785-cl-extra-10736215 Date issued/filed: 2024-02-09 Pages: 1 Docket text: Supplementary opinion from CourtListener cluster 10269625 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 22-1785V DANIEL JANOSIK, Personal Chief Special Master Corcoran Representative of the Estate of ELVA JANOSIK, deceased, Petitioner, Filed: January 4, 2024 v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Ronald Craig Homer, Conway, Homer, P.C., Boston, MA, for Petitioner. Kimberly Shubert Davey, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION ON DAMAGES1 On December 6, 2022, Daniel Janosik (“Petitioner”), as personal representative of the estate of Elva Janosik, 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 Ms. Janosik developed Guillain-Barré syndrome (“GBS”) as the result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccine administered to her on October 26, 2020, and that her death on December 17, 2020, was vaccine-related. 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 November 15, 2023, a ruling on entitlement was issued, finding Petitioner entitled to compensation for GBS. On January 3, 2024, Respondent filed a proffer on award of compensation (“Proffer”). Respondent represented that Petitioner agrees with the proffered award. Id. at 2. 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 a lump sum payment of $405,000.00 (representing $250,000.00 for the statutory benefit for a vaccine-related death, and $155,000.00 for past pain and suffering) in the form of a check payable to Petitioner, Daniel Janosik, as personal representative of the Estate of Elva Janosik. 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 ____________________________________ ) DANIEL JANOSIK, Personal ) Representative of the Estate of ) ELVA JANOSIK, deceased, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) No. 22-1785V v. ) Chief Special Master Corcoran (SPU) ) ECF SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND ) HUMAN SERVICES, ) ) Respondent. ) ____________________________________) RESPONDENT’S PROFFER ON AWARD OF COMPENSATION On December 6, 2022, Daniel Janosik, as personal representative of the Estate of Elva Janosik, 1 filed a petition stating that Elva Janosik developed Guillain-Barré syndrome (“GBS”), a Vaccine Table Injury, within the Table time frame following administration of a flu vaccine on October 26, 2020. Petitioner also alleged that Elva Janosik’s death is a sequelae of her GBS. On November 13, 2023, respondent filed a Rule 4(c) Report, conceding that petitioner’s claim meets the Table criteria for a GBS injury, and that Elva Janosik’s death was related to her GBS. ECF No. 26. The Court subsequently issued a Ruling on Entitlement finding petitioner entitled to compensation under the Vaccine Act. ECF No. 27. 1 Petitioner filed documentation on January 2, 2024, establishing that on June 1, 2022, he was appointed personal representative of Elva Janosik’s Estate under the laws of the State of Tennessee. See Exhibit 16. All references to petitioner herein refer solely to Daniel Janosik in his representative capacity as the personal representative of the Estate of Elva Janosik. 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 $155,000.00, 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), (a)(4), and (a)(1)(B). 2 Petitioner agrees. II. Form of the Award Respondent recommends that petitioner be awarded a lump sum payment of $405,000.00, in the form of a check payable to petitioner, Daniel Janosik, as personal representative of the Estate of Elva Janosik. 3 Petitioner agrees. 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 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 Elva Janosik 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 Elva Janosik upon submission of written documentation of such appointment to the Secretary. 2 JULIA M. COLLISON Assistant Director Torts Branch, Civil Division /s/ Kimberly S. Davey KIMBERLY S. DAVEY Trial Attorney Torts Branch, Civil Division U.S. Department of Justice P.O. Box 146 Benjamin Franklin Station Washington, D.C. 20044-0146 Tel: (202) 307-1815 Kimberly.Davey@usdoj.gov Dated: January 3, 2024 3 ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 5: USCOURTS-cofc-1_22-vv-01785-cl-extra-10804028 Date issued/filed: 2025-02-21 Pages: 1 Docket text: Supplementary opinion from CourtListener cluster 10337440 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 22-1785V DANIEL JANOSIK, Personal Representative of the Estate of Chief Special Master Corcoran ELVA JANOSIK, deceased, Filed: January 17, 2025 Petitioner, v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Ronald Craig Homer, Conway, Homer, P.C., Boston, MA, for Petitioner. Kimberly Shubert Davey, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION ON ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS 1 On December 6, 2022, Daniel Janosik, as personal representative of the estate of Elva Janosik (“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 alleged that Ms. Janosik developed Guillain-Barré syndrome as the result of an influenza vaccine administered to her on October 26, 2020, and that her death on December 17, 2020, was vaccine-related. Petition, ECF No. 1. On January 4, 2024, I 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). issued a decision awarding compensation to Petitioner based on the Respondent’s proffer. ECF No. 37. Petitioner has now filed a motion for attorneys’ fees and costs, requesting an award of $22,419.08 (representing $21,085.50 in fees, plus $1,333.58 in costs). Application for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs (“Motion”) filed June 24, 2024, ECF No. 42. Furthermore, Petitioner filed a signed statement representing that Petitioner incurred $3,841.11 in personal out-of-pocket expenses. ECF No. 43. Respondent reacted to the Motion on June 24, 2024, indicating 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 2-4, ECF No. 44. Petitioner filed no reply thereafter. 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. However, I find a minor reduction in the amount of fees 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. 2 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 practice ethically is obligated to exclude such hours from his fee submission.” Hensley, 461 U.S. at 434. ATTORNEY FEES After reviewing the billing records submitted with Petitioner’s request, the fees award must be reduced for redundant time expended on review of status reports, correspondence cover letters, and other cursory documents prepared by another attorney. See, e.g., ECF No. 42 at 12-16 (entries dated 3/11/23; 9/6/23; 10/23/23; 11/21/23; 12/29/23; 1/5/24; 1/9/24). I am aware that it is a common practice for Conway, Homer, P.C. to have several attorneys work on the same matter, even if one predominantly is responsible for hearings. In some instances, such as when preparing substantive documents like the petition, briefs, and settlement demands, it is reasonable to have another set of eyes review that document (and the Conway Homer, P.C. attorney s typically bill reasonable amounts that reflect their personal expertise, with more experienced counsel needing to spend less time on matters than newer attorneys). However, it is not reasonable to have an attorney bill for time to review routine filings, such as status reports, joint notice not to seek review, and motions for enlargement of time, when those filings were prepared (and billed for) by another attorney. And this is not the first time I or other special masters have noted this particular issue concerning Conway, Homer, P.C. billing practices. See, e.g., Manetta v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., No. 18-172V, 2020 WL 7392813, at *2 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Nov 19, 2020); Lyons v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., No. 18-414V, 2020 WL 6578229 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Oct. 2, 2020). Accordingly, Petitioner will not receive fees for redundant efforts. This results in a reduction in the amount of fees to be awarded of $438.50. ATTORNEY COSTS Petitioner has also requested a total of $1,333.58 in attorney’s costs. Petitioner has provided documentation supporting such claimed costs (ECF No. 42 at 20-33) and I find them reasonable and hereby award them in full. Additionally, Petitioner requests $3,841.11 in personally incurred out-of-pocket expenses. Petitioner incurred these costs for the sole purpose of establishing the estate of his late wife, Elva Janosik, and for the purpose of becoming appointed as the personal representative of his late wife’s estate. 3 Id. at 29-35. I note that “Special masters generally award the reasonable costs of establishing an estate and appointing a representative,” but not costs which are excessive or related to the administration of the estate. Fulling v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., No. 18-1549V, 2022 WL 3023505, at *3 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. July 11, 2022); accord. Durand v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., No. 15-1153V, 2020 WL 639372, at *6-7 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Jan. 16, 2020). I have reviewed the billing records submitted with this request and find them to be reasonable. Respondent offered no specific objection to the rates or amounts sought. Thus, I find all requested costs reasonable and hereby award them in full. CONCLUSION 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 attorneys’ fees and costs. Petitioner is awarded attorneys’ fees and costs in the total amount of $25,821.69 (representing $21,980.58 in attorney’s fees and costs, plus $3,841.11 representing Petitioner’s personally incurred out-of-pocket expenses) 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. 4