VICP Registry Case Source Bundle Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_23-vv-01121 Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_23-vv-01121 Petitioner: Carolyn Scott Filed: 2023-07-19 Decided: 2024-12-26 Vaccine: influenza Vaccination date: 2022-10-14 Condition: shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) Outcome: compensated Award amount USD: 71521 AI-assisted case summary: Carolyn Scott filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, alleging she suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) resulting from an influenza vaccine received on October 14, 2022. She alleged the injury lasted longer than six months and that she had not received other compensation for it. The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, filed a Rule 4(c) report conceding that Ms. Scott was entitled to compensation. The respondent agreed that her injury was consistent with SIRVA as defined by the Vaccine Injury Table, noting that she had no prior shoulder issues, the pain occurred within 48 hours of vaccination, was limited to the injection site, and no other condition explained the pain. The respondent also agreed that her condition lasted more than six months and that she met all legal prerequisites for compensation. Based on the respondent's concession and the evidence, the Chief Special Master issued a ruling on entitlement, finding Ms. Scott entitled to compensation. Subsequently, the respondent filed a proffer on award of compensation, recommending an award of $71,521.06, which included $67,500.00 for pain and suffering and $4,021.06 for past unreimbursable expenses. Ms. Scott agreed with this proffered award. The Chief Special Master issued a decision awarding Ms. Scott the lump sum of $71,521.06. Theory of causation field: Table Public staged source text: ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_23-vv-01121-0 Date issued/filed: 2024-06-27 Pages: 2 Docket text: PUBLIC ORDER/RULING (Originally filed: 05/28/2024) regarding 19 Ruling on Entitlement Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. (ppa) Service on parties made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:23-vv-01121-UNJ Document 21 Filed 06/27/24 Page 1 of 2 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 23-1121V CAROLYN SCOTT, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: May 28, 2024 v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Leah VaSahnja Durant, Law Offices of Leah V. Durant, PLLC, Washington, DC, for Petitioner. Camille Michelle Collett, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1 On July 19, 2023, Carolyn Scott 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 an influenza (“flu”) vaccine received on October 14, 2022. Petition at 1. Petitioner further alleges that the vaccine was received in the United States, her injury lasted longer than six months, and neither Petitioner, nor any other party, has received compensation in the form of an award or settlement for her vaccine-related injury. Petition at ¶¶ 1, 2, 12, 13; Ex. 1; Ex. 4 at 68. 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 1:23-vv-01121-UNJ Document 21 Filed 06/27/24 Page 2 of 2 On May 24, 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 left 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 4. Respondent further agrees that the 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 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_23-vv-01121-cl-extra-10734896 Date issued/filed: 2024-06-27 Pages: 1 Docket text: Supplementary opinion from CourtListener cluster 10268306 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 23-1121V CAROLYN SCOTT, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: May 28, 2024 v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Leah VaSahnja Durant, Law Offices of Leah V. Durant, PLLC, Washington, DC, for Petitioner. Camille Michelle Collett, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1 On July 19, 2023, Carolyn Scott 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 an influenza (“flu”) vaccine received on October 14, 2022. Petition at 1. Petitioner further alleges that the vaccine was received in the United States, her injury lasted longer than six months, and neither Petitioner, nor any other party, has received compensation in the form of an award or settlement for her vaccine-related injury. Petition at ¶¶ 1, 2, 12, 13; Ex. 1; Ex. 4 at 68. 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 May 24, 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 left 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 4. Respondent further agrees that the 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 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_23-vv-01121-1 Date issued/filed: 2024-12-26 Pages: 5 Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 11/26/2024) regarding 29 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer, Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. (ppa) Service on parties made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:23-vv-01121-UNJ Document 33 Filed 12/26/24 Page 1 of 5 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 23-1121V CAROLYN SCOTT, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: November 26, 2024 v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Leah VaSahnja Durant, Law Offices of Leah V. Durant, PLLC, Washington, DC, for Petitioner. Camille Michelle Collett, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1 On July 19, 2023, Carolyn Scott 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 an influenza (“flu”) vaccine received on October 14, 2022. Petition at 1. Petitioner further alleges that the vaccine was received in the United States, her injury lasted longer than six months, and neither Petitioner, nor any other party, has received compensation in the form of an award or settlement for her vaccine-related injury. Petition at ¶¶ 1, 2, 12, 13; Ex. 1; Ex. 4 at 68. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters. On May 28, 2024, a ruling on entitlement was issued, finding Petitioner entitled to compensation for SIRVA. On November 26, 2024, Respondent filed a proffer on award 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 1:23-vv-01121-UNJ Document 33 Filed 12/26/24 Page 2 of 5 of compensation (“Proffer”) indicating Petitioner should be awarded $71,521.06. 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 $71,521.06 (comprised of $67,500.00 in pain and suffering and $4,021.06 in past unreimbursable expenses) in the form of a check payable to Petitioner. This amount represents compensation for all damages that would be available under Section 15(a). The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this decision.3 IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Brian H. Corcoran Brian H. Corcoran Chief Special Master 3 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment can be expedited by the parties’ joint filing of notice renouncing the right to seek review. 2 Case 1:23-vv-01121-UNJ Document 33 Filed 12/26/24 Page 3 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS ) CAROLYN SCOTT, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) No. 23-1121V v. ) Chief Special Master Corcoran ) ECF SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN ) SERVICES, ) ) Respondent. ) ) RESPONDENT’S PROFFER ON AWARD OF COMPENSATION On July 19, 2023, Carolyn Scott (“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 Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (“SIRVA”), as defined in the Vaccine Injury Table, following administration of an influenza vaccine she received on October 14, 2022. Petition at 1. On May 24, 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 May 28, 2024, the Chief Special Master issued a Ruling on Entitlement finding petitioner entitled to compensation. ECF No. 17; ECF No. 19. I. Items of Compensation A. Pain and Suffering Respondent proffers that petitioner should be awarded $67,500.00 in pain and suffering. See 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a)(4). Petitioner agrees. Case 1:23-vv-01121-UNJ Document 33 Filed 12/26/24 Page 4 of 5 B. Past Unreimbursable Expenses Evidence supplied by petitioner documents that she incurred past unreimbursable expenses related to her vaccine-related injury. Respondent proffers that petitioner should be awarded past unreimbursable expenses in the amount of $4,021.06. See 42 U.S.C. § 300aa- 15(a)(1)(B). Petitioner agrees. These amounts represent all elements of compensation to which petitioner is entitled under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). Petitioner agrees. 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 Chief Special Master’s decision and the Court’s judgment award the following1: a lump sum payment of $71,521.06, in the form of a check payable to petitioner. III. Summary of Recommended Payments Following Judgment Lump sum payable to petitioner, Carolyn Scott: $71,521.06 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 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 lost earnings and future pain and suffering. 2 Case 1:23-vv-01121-UNJ Document 33 Filed 12/26/24 Page 5 of 5 VORIS E. JOHNSON Assistant Director Torts Branch, Civil Division /s/ Camille M. Collett CAMILLE M. COLLETT 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) 616-4098 E-mail: Camille.M.Collett@usdoj.gov DATED: November 26, 2024 3 ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 4: USCOURTS-cofc-1_23-vv-01121-cl-extra-10771215 Date issued/filed: 2024-12-26 Pages: 1 Docket text: Supplementary opinion from CourtListener cluster 10304627 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 23-1121V CAROLYN SCOTT, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: November 26, 2024 v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Leah VaSahnja Durant, Law Offices of Leah V. Durant, PLLC, Washington, DC, for Petitioner. Camille Michelle Collett, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1 On July 19, 2023, Carolyn Scott 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 an influenza (“flu”) vaccine received on October 14, 2022. Petition at 1. Petitioner further alleges that the vaccine was received in the United States, her injury lasted longer than six months, and neither Petitioner, nor any other party, has received compensation in the form of an award or settlement for her vaccine-related injury. Petition at ¶¶ 1, 2, 12, 13; Ex. 1; Ex. 4 at 68. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters. On May 28, 2024, a ruling on entitlement was issued, finding Petitioner entitled to compensation for SIRVA. On November 26, 2024, Respondent filed a proffer on award 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). of compensation (“Proffer”) indicating Petitioner should be awarded $71,521.06. 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 $71,521.06 (comprised of $67,500.00 in pain and suffering and $4,021.06 in past unreimbursable expenses) in the form of a check payable to Petitioner. This amount represents compensation for all damages that would be available under Section 15(a). The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this decision.3 IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Brian H. Corcoran Brian H. Corcoran Chief Special Master 3 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment can be expedited by the parties’ joint filing of notice renouncing the right to seek review. 2 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS ) CAROLYN SCOTT, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) No. 23-1121V v. ) Chief Special Master Corcoran ) ECF SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN ) SERVICES, ) ) Respondent. ) ) RESPONDENT’S PROFFER ON AWARD OF COMPENSATION On July 19, 2023, Carolyn Scott (“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 Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (“SIRVA”), as defined in the Vaccine Injury Table, following administration of an influenza vaccine she received on October 14, 2022. Petition at 1. On May 24, 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 May 28, 2024, the Chief Special Master issued a Ruling on Entitlement finding petitioner entitled to compensation. ECF No. 17; ECF No. 19. I. Items of Compensation A. Pain and Suffering Respondent proffers that petitioner should be awarded $67,500.00 in pain and suffering. See 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a)(4). Petitioner agrees. B. Past Unreimbursable Expenses Evidence supplied by petitioner documents that she incurred past unreimbursable expenses related to her vaccine-related injury. Respondent proffers that petitioner should be awarded past unreimbursable expenses in the amount of $4,021.06. See 42 U.S.C. § 300aa- 15(a)(1)(B). Petitioner agrees. These amounts represent all elements of compensation to which petitioner is entitled under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). Petitioner agrees. 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 Chief Special Master’s decision and the Court’s judgment award the following 1: a lump sum payment of $71,521.06, in the form of a check payable to petitioner. III. Summary of Recommended Payments Following Judgment Lump sum payable to petitioner, Carolyn Scott: $71,521.06 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 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 lost earnings and future pain and suffering. 2 VORIS E. JOHNSON Assistant Director Torts Branch, Civil Division /s/ Camille M. Collett CAMILLE M. COLLETT 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) 616-4098 E-mail: Camille.M.Collett@usdoj.gov DATED: November 26, 2024 3 ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 5: USCOURTS-cofc-1_23-vv-01121-cl-extra-11129273 Date issued/filed: 2025-08-28 Pages: 1 Docket text: Supplementary opinion from CourtListener cluster 10662686 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 23-1121V CAROLYN SCOTT, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, v. Filed: July 28, 2025 SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Leah VaSahnja Durant, Law Offices of Leah V. Durant, PLLC, Washington, DC, for Petitioner. Camille Michelle Collett, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION ON ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS 1 On July 19, 2023, Carolyn Scott 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 an influenza vaccine received on October 14, 2022. Petition, ECF No. 1. On November 26, 2024, I issued a decision awarding compensation to Petitioner based on the Respondent’s proffer. ECF No. 29. 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 an amended motion for attorney’s fees and costs, requesting an award of $27,313.63 (representing $26,251.60 in fees plus $1,062.03 in costs). Motion to Amend/Correct the Motion for Attorney’s Fees, filed on June 11, 2025. ECF No. 38. Furthermore, Petitioner filed a signed statement representing that no personal out-of-pocket expenses were incurred. ECF No. 34 at 2. Respondent reacted to the motion on February 27, 2025, reporting that he is satisfied 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. 35. Petitioner filed a reply requesting an award of fees and costs as indicated in the Motion. ECF No. 36. I have reviewed the billing records submitted with Petitioner’s requests and find a reduction in the amount of fees to be awarded appropriate, for the reasons set forth below. ANALYSIS The Vaccine Act permits an award of reasonable attorney’s fees and costs for successful claimants. Section 15(e). Counsel must submit fee requests that include contemporaneous and specific billing records indicating the service performed, the number of hours expended on the service, and the name of the person performing the service. See Savin v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 85 Fed. Cl. 313, 316-18 (2008). Counsel should not include in their fee requests hours that are “excessive, redundant, or otherwise unnecessary.” Saxton v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 3 F.3d 1517, 1521 (Fed. Cir. 1993) (quoting Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424, 434 (1983)). It is “well within the special master’s discretion to reduce the hours to a number that, in [her] experience and judgment, [is] reasonable for the work done.” Id. at 1522. Furthermore, the special master may reduce a fee request sua sponte, apart from objections raised by respondent and without providing a petitioner notice and opportunity to respond. See Sabella v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 86 Fed. Cl. 201, 209 (2009). A special master need not engage in a line-by-line analysis of petitioner’s fee application when reducing fees. Broekelschen v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 102 Fed. Cl. 719, 729 (2011). The petitioner “bears the burden of establishing the hours expended, the rates charged, and the expenses incurred.” Wasson v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 24 Cl. Ct. 482, 484 (1991). The Petitioner “should present adequate proof [of the attorney’s fees and costs sought] at the time of the submission.” Wasson, 24 Cl. Ct. at 484 n.1. Petitioner’s counsel “should make a good faith effort to exclude from a fee request hours that are excessive, redundant, or otherwise unnecessary, just as a lawyer in private 2 practice ethically is obligated to exclude such hours from his fee submission.” Hensley, 461 U.S. at 434. ATTORNEY FEES The hourly rates requested by attorneys Leah Durant, Richard Amada, Mike Milmoe, and their supporting paralegals through the end of 2024, are reasonable and consistent with our prior determinations and will therefore be adopted. However, the proposed hourly of $475.00 for 2024 time billed by Elizabeth Vitt and the rate of $550.00 for 2025 time billed by Ms. Durant require further evaluation and adjustment. Attorney Durant was previously awarded the lesser rates of $530.00 for work performed in 2025. See Jackman v. Sec’y of Health & Hum. Servs., No. 23-1749, Slip Op. 36 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. June 24, 2025). I find no reason to deviate from such reasoned determination and it otherwise is not the practice of OSM to adjust prior rate determinations upward in later cases. See Jefferson v. Sec’y of Health & Hum. Servs., No. 19-1882V, 2023 WL 387051 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Jan. 9, 2023). Accordingly, I hereby reduce Ms. Durant’s rate for work performed in 2025 to be consistent with the the aforementioned decision. Application of the foregoing reduces the amount of fees to be awarded by $74.00. 3 Attorney Elizabeth Vitt has been a licensed attorney since 2006 (ECF No. 39 at 1), placing her in the range of attorneys with 11-19 years’ experience based on the OSM Fee Schedules. 4 I incorporate by reference all of the explanatory notes contained in these rate schedules. Although her proposed rate of $475.00 falls within the relevant experience range provided in these ranges for similarly-situated attorneys, I find her specifically-requested rate to be excessive based on her lack of experience representing Petitioners in the Vaccine Program. See McCulloch v. Health & Human Services, No. 09–293V, 2015 WL 5634323, at *17 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Sept. 1, 2015) (stating the following factors are paramount in deciding a reasonable forum hourly rate: experience in the Vaccine Program, overall legal experience, the quality of work performed, and the reputation in the legal community and community at large). 3 This amount consists of reduce Leah Durant’s 2025 hourly rate and is calculated as f ollows ($550.00 - $530.00 = $20.00 x 3.70 hours billed) = $74.00 in f ees to be reduced. 4 The Attorneys’ Fee Schedule is available at https://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/osm-attorneys-forum-hourly- rate-f ee-schedules 3 This appears to be the first case establishing a program hourly rate for Ms. Vitt and she was also recently admitted to this Court as of October 2024 (hence – less than one year ago). It is therefore improper for Ms. Vitt to receive an hourly rate on the higher end of the experience ranges, when those rates are reserved for attorneys who also have lengthy experience representing Petitioners in the Program. Thus, based on the factors relevant to determining proper hourly rates for Program attorneys, a rate of $430.00 is more appropriate for Ms. Vitt’s time in 2024. Application of the foregoing reduces the fees to be awarded by $306.00. 5 ATTORNEY’S COSTS Petitioner has otherwise provided 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. 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 attorney’s fees and costs. I award a total of $26,933.63 (representing $25,871.60 in fees plus $1,062.03 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 5 This amount consists of reducing Elizabeth Vitt’s 2024 hourly rate and is calculated as follows: ($475.00 - $430.00 = $45.00 x 6.80 hours billed) = $306.00 in f ees to be reduced. 6 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