VICP Registry Case Source Bundle Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_23-vv-01228 Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_23-vv-01228 Petitioner: Vaughn Costello Filed: 2023-08-03 Decided: 2024-04-24 Vaccine: Tdap Vaccination date: 2021-11-11 Condition: brachial neuritis Outcome: entitlement_granted_pending_damages Award amount USD: AI-assisted case summary: Vaughn Costello filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program alleging he developed brachial neuritis in his right shoulder. He received both an influenza (Flu) vaccine and a tetanus-diphtheria-acellular-pertussis (Tdap) vaccine on November 11, 2021. Initially, Mr. Costello alleged injury only from the Flu vaccine, but the respondent argued against compensation, stating he had not established a valid causation-in-fact claim. Mr. Costello later amended his petition to claim injury from both vaccines. The respondent then conceded entitlement, agreeing that Mr. Costello satisfied the criteria for brachial neuritis resulting from the Tdap vaccine. The respondent noted that the injury presented as pain in the right arm and shoulder within two to 28 days of vaccination, EMG/NCS studies localized the injury to the brachial plexus, and no other condition could explain the symptoms. The case is proceeding to the damages phase. The respondent maintained that Mr. Costello had not established a causation-in-fact claim for the Flu vaccine. Theory of causation field: Table Public staged source text: ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_23-vv-01228-0 Date issued/filed: 2024-05-20 Pages: 2 Docket text: PUBLIC ORDER/RULING (Originally filed: 4/23/2024) regarding 28 Ruling on Entitlement. Signed by Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey. (kis) Service on parties made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:23-vv-01228-UNJ Document 32 Filed 05/20/24 Page 1 of 2 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS Filed: April 23, 2024 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * VAUGHN COSTELLO, * UNPUBLISHED * Petitioner, * No. 23-1228V * v. * Special Master Dorsey * SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Ruling on Entitlement; Concession; AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Table Injury; Tetanus-Diphtheria- * Acellular-Pertussis (“Tdap”) Vaccine; Respondent. * Brachial Neuritis. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Renee J. Gentry, Law Office of Renee J, Gentry, Washington, DC, for Petitioner. Sarah Black Rifkin, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1 On August 3, 2023, Vaughn Costello (“Petitioner”) filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (“the Program”)2 alleging that he developed brachial neuritis in his right shoulder resulting from an influenza (“Flu”) vaccination he received on November 11, 2021. Petition at Preamble (ECF No. 1). Petitioner also received a tetanus-diphtheria-acellular-pertussis (“Tdap”) vaccine on November 11, 2021, but he did not allege any injury stemming from the Tdap vaccine. Id. at ¶ 5. 1 Because this Ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the undersigned is required to post it 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, the undersigned agrees that the identified material fits within this definition, the undersigned will redact such material from public access. 2 The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program is set forth in Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755, codified as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-10 to -34 (2018). All citations in this Ruling to individual sections of the Vaccine Act are to 42 U.S.C. § 300aa. 1 Case 1:23-vv-01228-UNJ Document 32 Filed 05/20/24 Page 2 of 2 On February 12, 2024, Respondent filed his initial Rule 4(c) report, arguing against compensation. Respondent’s Report (“Resp. Rept.”) (ECF No. 19). Petitioner had not alleged a Table injury and, in Respondent’s view, had failed to assert a valid causation-in-fact claim. Id. at 7-9. On March 13, 2024, Petitioner filed an amended petition to claim injury from both the flu and Tdap vaccines. Amended Petition at Preamble (ECF No. 21). Specifically, he requested compensation for “brachial neuritis resulting from adverse effects of a [Tdap] vaccination, and [flu] vaccination received on November 11, 2021.” Id. On April 24, 2023, Respondent filed an amended Rule 4(c) report in which he concedes that Petitioner is now entitled to compensation in this case based on the amended claim. Amended Resp. Rept. at 1 (ECF No. 27). Based on a review of the medical records, Respondent states that Petitioner “has satisfied the criteria set forth in the Vaccine Injury Table and the Qualifications and Aids to Interpretation for brachial neuritis resulting from his Tdap vaccine.”3 Id. at 7. Specifically, Respondent states that the pain in Petitioner’s right arm and shoulder was a presenting symptom and occurred between two and 28 days after vaccination; EMG/NCS studies showed that Petitioner’s injury was localized to the brachial plexus; physical examination and EMG/NCS studies were consistent in confirming that Petitioner’s dysfunction was attributable to the brachial plexus; and no other condition or abnormality can explain Petitioner’s symptoms. Id. at 7-8. Therefore, Petitioner is entitled to compensation for his Table injury of brachial neuritis and its sequelae. Id. at 8. A special master may determine whether a petitioner is entitled to compensation based upon the record. A hearing is not required. § 300aa-13; Vaccine Rule 8(d). In light of Respondent’s concession and a review of the record, the undersigned finds Petitioner is entitled to compensation. This matter will now proceed to the damages phase. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Nora Beth Dorsey Nora Beth Dorsey Special Master 33 Brachial neuritis is not a presumptive Table injury for the flu vaccine. To the extent that Petitioner claims injury from the flu vaccine administered on November 11, 2021, Respondent maintains that petitioner has not established a causation-in-fact claim. Amended Resp. Rept. at 7 n.5. 2 ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 2: USCOURTS-cofc-1_23-vv-01228-cl-extra-10735291 Date issued/filed: 2024-05-20 Pages: 1 Docket text: Supplementary opinion from CourtListener cluster 10268701 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS Filed: April 23, 2024 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * VAUGHN COSTELLO, * UNPUBLISHED * Petitioner, * No. 23-1228V * v. * Special Master Dorsey * SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Ruling on Entitlement; Concession; AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Table Injury; Tetanus-Diphtheria- * Acellular-Pertussis (“Tdap”) Vaccine; Respondent. * Brachial Neuritis. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Renee J. Gentry, Law Office of Renee J, Gentry, Washington, DC, for Petitioner. Sarah Black Rifkin, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1 On August 3, 2023, Vaughn Costello (“Petitioner”) filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (“the Program”)2 alleging that he developed brachial neuritis in his right shoulder resulting from an influenza (“Flu”) vaccination he received on November 11, 2021. Petition at Preamble (ECF No. 1). Petitioner also received a tetanus-diphtheria-acellular-pertussis (“Tdap”) vaccine on November 11, 2021, but he did not allege any injury stemming from the Tdap vaccine. Id. at ¶ 5. 1 Because this Ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the undersigned is required to post it 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, the undersigned agrees that the identified material fits within this definition, the undersigned will redact such material from public access. 2 The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program is set forth in Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755, codified as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-10 to -34 (2018). All citations in this Ruling to individual sections of the Vaccine Act are to 42 U.S.C. § 300aa. 1 On February 12, 2024, Respondent filed his initial Rule 4(c) report, arguing against compensation. Respondent’s Report (“Resp. Rept.”) (ECF No. 19). Petitioner had not alleged a Table injury and, in Respondent’s view, had failed to assert a valid causation-in-fact claim. Id. at 7-9. On March 13, 2024, Petitioner filed an amended petition to claim injury from both the flu and Tdap vaccines. Amended Petition at Preamble (ECF No. 21). Specifically, he requested compensation for “brachial neuritis resulting from adverse effects of a [Tdap] vaccination, and [flu] vaccination received on November 11, 2021.” Id. On April 24, 2023, Respondent filed an amended Rule 4(c) report in which he concedes that Petitioner is now entitled to compensation in this case based on the amended claim. Amended Resp. Rept. at 1 (ECF No. 27). Based on a review of the medical records, Respondent states that Petitioner “has satisfied the criteria set forth in the Vaccine Injury Table and the Qualifications and Aids to Interpretation for brachial neuritis resulting from his Tdap vaccine.”3 Id. at 7. Specifically, Respondent states that the pain in Petitioner’s right arm and shoulder was a presenting symptom and occurred between two and 28 days after vaccination; EMG/NCS studies showed that Petitioner’s injury was localized to the brachial plexus; physical examination and EMG/NCS studies were consistent in confirming that Petitioner’s dysfunction was attributable to the brachial plexus; and no other condition or abnormality can explain Petitioner’s symptoms. Id. at 7-8. Therefore, Petitioner is entitled to compensation for his Table injury of brachial neuritis and its sequelae. Id. at 8. A special master may determine whether a petitioner is entitled to compensation based upon the record. A hearing is not required. § 300aa-13; Vaccine Rule 8(d). In light of Respondent’s concession and a review of the record, the undersigned finds Petitioner is entitled to compensation. This matter will now proceed to the damages phase. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Nora Beth Dorsey Nora Beth Dorsey Special Master 33 Brachial neuritis is not a presumptive Table injury for the flu vaccine. To the extent that Petitioner claims injury from the flu vaccine administered on November 11, 2021, Respondent maintains that petitioner has not established a causation-in-fact claim. Amended Resp. Rept. at 7 n.5. 2 ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 3: USCOURTS-cofc-1_23-vv-01228-1 Date issued/filed: 2025-01-13 Pages: 2 Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 12/18/2024) regarding 56 DECISION Proffer. Signed by Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey. (aevw) Service on parties made. (Main Document 60 replaced on 6/17/2025 to correct a typo.) (fm). -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:23-vv-01228-UNJ Document 60 Filed 01/13/25 Page 1 of 2 CORRECTED In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS Filed: December 18, 2024 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * VAUGHN COSTELLO, * * Petitioner, * No. 23-1228V * v. * Special Master Dorsey * SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Damages Award; Tetanus-Diphtheria- AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Acellular Pertussis (“Tdap”) Vaccine; * Influenza (“Flu”) Vaccine; Brachial Respondent. * Neuritis. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Renee Ja Gentry, Law Offices of Renee J. Gentry, Washington, DC, for Petitioner. Sarah Black Rifkin, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES BASED ON PROFFER1 On August 3, 2023, Vaughn Costello (“Petitioner”) filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (“Vaccine Act” or “the Program”), 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-10 et seq. (2018).2 Petitioner filed an amended petition for compensation on March 13, 2024. Petitioner alleged that as a result of tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis (“Tdap”) and influenza (“flu”) vaccines administered on November 11,2021, he developed brachial neuritis in his right shoulder. Amended Petition at Preamble (ECF No. 21). On April 23, 2024, Respondent filed his amended Rule 4(c) report recommending that compensation be awarded “under the terms of the Vaccine Act with respect to the right-sided brachial neuritis that 1 Because this Decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the undersigned is required to post it 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, the undersigned agrees that the identified material fits within this definition, the undersigned will redact such material from public access. 2 The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program is set forth in Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755, codified as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-10 to -34 (2018). All citations in this Decision to individual sections of the Vaccine Act are to 42 U.S.C. § 300aa. Case 1:23-vv-01228-UNJ Document 60 Filed 01/13/25 Page 2 of 2 petitioner presumptively sustained from the Tdap vaccine.”3 Amended Respondent’s Report, filed Apr. 23, 2024, at 9 (ECF No. 27). Later that day, the undersigned issued a ruling finding Petitioner entitled to compensation. Ruling on Entitlement dated Apr. 23, 2024 (ECF No. 28). On December 18, 2024, Respondent filed a Proffer on Award of Compensation (“Proffer”), attached hereto as Appendix A. In the Proffer, Respondent represented that Petitioner agrees with the proffered award. Proffer at 2. Based on the record as a whole, the undersigned finds that Petitioner is entitled to an award as stated in the Proffer. Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Proffer, the undersigned awards Petitioner: (1) A lump sum payment of $65,000.00 representing compensation for pain and suffering in the form of a check payable to Petitioner. Proffer at 2. This amount represents all elements of compensation to which petitioner is entitled under § 15(a). Id. In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the Clerk of the Court SHALL ENTER JUDGMENT herewith.4 IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Nora Beth Dorsey Nora Beth Dorsey Special Master 3 Respondent maintains “[b]rachial neuritis is not a presumptive Table injury for the flu vaccine. To the extent that petitioner claims injury from the flu vaccine administered on November 11, 2021, respondent maintains that petitioner has not established a causation-in-fact claim.” Proffer at 2 n.2. 4 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment is expedited by the parties’ joint filing of notice renouncing the right to seek review. 2 ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 4: USCOURTS-cofc-1_23-vv-01228-cl-extra-10779309 Date issued/filed: 2025-01-13 Pages: 1 Docket text: Supplementary opinion from CourtListener cluster 10312721 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS Filed: December 18, 2024 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * VAUGHN COSTELLO, * * Petitioner, * No. 23-1228V * v. * Special Master Dorsey * SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Damages Award; Tetanus-Diphtheria- AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Acellular Pertussis (“Tdap”) Vaccine; * Influenza (“Flu”) Vaccine; Brachial Respondent. * Neuritis. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Renee Ja Gentry, Law Offices of Renee J. Gentry, Washington, DC, for Petitioner. Sarah Black Rifkin, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES BASED ON PROFFER 1 On August 3, 2024, Vaugh Costello (“Petitioner”) filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (“Vaccine Act” or “the Program”), 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-10 et seq. (2018). 2 Petitioner filed an amended petition for compensation on March 13, 2024. Petitioner alleged that as a result of tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis (“Tdap”) and influenza (“flu”) vaccines administered on November 11,2021, he developed brachial neuritis in his right shoulder. Amended Petition at Preamble (ECF No. 21). On April 23, 2024, Respondent filed his amended Rule 4(c) report recommending that compensation be awarded “under the terms of the Vaccine Act with respect to the right-sided brachial neuritis that 1 Because this Decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the undersigned is required to post it 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, the undersigned agrees that the identified material fits within this definition, the undersigned will redact such material from public access. 2 The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program is set forth in Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755, codified as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-10 to -34 (2018). All citations in this Decision to individual sections of the Vaccine Act are to 42 U.S.C. § 300aa. petitioner presumptively sustained from the Tdap vaccine.” 3 Amended Respondent’s Report, filed Apr. 23, 2024, at 9 (ECF No. 27). Later that day, the undersigned issued a ruling finding Petitioner entitled to compensation. Ruling on Entitlement dated Apr. 23, 2024 (ECF No. 28). On December 18, 2024, Respondent filed a Proffer on Award of Compensation (“Proffer”), attached hereto as Appendix A. In the Proffer, Respondent represented that Petitioner agrees with the proffered award. Proffer at 2. Based on the record as a whole, the undersigned finds that Petitioner is entitled to an award as stated in the Proffer. Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Proffer, the undersigned awards Petitioner: (1) A lump sum payment of $65,000.00 representing compensation for pain and suffering in the form of a check payable to Petitioner. Proffer at 2. This amount represents all elements of compensation to which petitioner is entitled under § 15(a). Id. In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the Clerk of the Court SHALL ENTER JUDGMENT herewith. 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Nora Beth Dorsey Nora Beth Dorsey Special Master 3 Respondent maintains “[b]rachial neuritis is not a presumptive Table injury for the flu vaccine. To the extent that petitioner claims injury from the flu vaccine administered on November 11, 2021, respondent maintains that petitioner has not established a causation-in-fact claim.” Proffer at 2 n.2. 4 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment is 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 VAUGHN COSTELLO, Petitioner, No. 23-1228V (ECF) Special Master Dorsey v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. RESPONDENT’S PROFFER ON AWARD OF COMPENSATION On August 3, 2023, petitioner filed a petition for compensation (“Petition”), under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 to -34 (“Vaccine Act” or “Act”), as amended. He alleged that he developed “brachial neuritis in his right shoulder, resulting from adverse effects of an influenza vaccination received on November 11, 2021.” Petition, ECF No. 1 at 1. On March 13, 2024, petitioner amended his petition to include a second vaccine, alleging a brachial neuritis injury “resulting from adverse effects of a DTaP vaccination, and influenza vaccination received on November 11, 2021.” 1 Amended Petition, ECF No. 21 at 1. On April 23, 2024, the Secretary of Health and Human Services (“respondent”) filed an Amended Rule 4(c) Report indicating that this case is appropriate for compensation under the 1 Petitioner’s medical records indicate that he received a tetanus, diphtheria, and acellular pertussis (“Tdap”) vaccine, rather than a DTaP vaccine. However, as both vaccines contain tetanus toxoid, the Table analysis in this claim is unchanged. terms of the Act for a Table injury, specifically brachial neuritis resulting from a Tdap vaccine. 2 ECF No. 27. Later that day, the Special Master issued a Ruling on Entitlement finding petitioner entitled to compensation. ECF No. 28. I. Items of Compensation Respondent proffers that petitioner should be awarded $65,000.00 in pain and suffering. See 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a)(4). Petitioner agrees. This amount 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 Special Master’s decision and the Court’s judgment award the following:3 a lump sum payment of $65,000.00, in the form of a check payable to petitioner. III. Summary of Recommended Payment Following Judgment Lump sum payable to petitioner, Vaughn Costello: $65,000.00 2 Brachial neuritis is not a presumptive Table injury for the flu vaccine. To the extent that petitioner claims injury from the flu vaccine administered on November 11, 2021, respondent maintains that petitioner has not established a causation-in-fact claim. 3 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 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 TRACI R. PATTON Assistant Director Torts Branch, Civil Division s/ Sarah B. Rifkin SARAH B. RIFKIN 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) 305-5997 Sarah.Rifkin@usdoj.gov Dated: December 18, 2024 3 ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 5: USCOURTS-cofc-1_23-vv-01228-cl-extra-11098238 Date issued/filed: 2025-07-11 Pages: 1 Docket text: Supplementary opinion from CourtListener cluster 10631651 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CORRECTED In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS Filed: June 16, 2025 * * * * * * * * * * * * * VAUGHN COSTELLO, * UNPUBLISHED * Petitioner, * No. 23-1228V * v. * Special Master Dorsey * SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Attorneys’ Fees and Costs. AND HUMAN SERVICES, * * Respondent. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Renee Ja Gentry, Law Offices of Renee J. Gentry, Washington, DC, for Petitioner. Sarah Black Rifkin, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION AWARDING ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS1 On August 3, 2023, Vaughn Costello (“Petitioner”) filed a petition in the National Vaccine Injury Program 2 alleging that as a result of receiving tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis (“Tdap”) and influenza (“flu”) vaccines on November 11, 2021, he developed brachial neuritis in his right shoulder. Amended Petition at Preamble (ECF No. 21). The undersigned issued a ruling finding Petitioner entitled to compensation. Ruling on Entitlement dated Apr. 23, 2024 (ECF No. 28). The undersigned issued a Decision awarding damages based on proffer on 1 Because this unpublished Decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the undersigned is required to post it 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, the undersigned agrees that the identified material fits within this definition, the undersigned will redact such material from public access. 2 The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program is set forth in Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755, codified as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-10 to -34 (2018) (“Vaccine Act” or “the Act”). All citations in this Decision to individual sections of the Vaccine Act are to 42 U.S.C.A. § 300aa. 1 December 18, 2024. Decision Awarding Damages Based on Proffer dated Dec. 18, 2024 (ECF No. 56). On February 6, 2025, Petitioner filed an application for attorneys’ fees and costs. Petitioner’s Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs (“Pet. Mot.”), filed Feb. 6, 2025 (ECF No. 61). Petitioner requests compensation in the amount of $27,013.35, representing $26,470.25 in attorneys’ fees and $543.10 in costs. Id. at 1. Petitioner warrants that he has not personally incurred any costs in pursuit of her claim for compensation. Id. at 1-2. Respondent filed his response on February 19, 2025, stating he “is satisfied the statutory requirements for an award of attorneys’ fees and costs are met in this case.” Respondent’s Response to Pet. Mot., filed Feb. 19, 2025, at 2 (ECF No. 62). Petitioner did not file a reply thereafter. The matter is now ripe for disposition. Petitioner requests the following hourly rates for the work of his counsel: for Ms. Renee Gentry, $504.00 per hour for work performed in 2022, $531.00 per hour for work performed in 2023, $561.00 per hour for work performed in 2024, and $602.00 per hour for work performed in 2025. Petitioner also requests $175.00 per hour for work performed by her counsel’s paralegal in 2022, 2023, and 2024. The undersigned finds the rates for 2022 to 2024 are consistent with what counsel have previously been awarded for their Vaccine Program work, and finds them to be reasonable herein. The undersigned also finds Ms. Gentry’s 2025 rate reasonable and within the OSM fee schedule for attorneys with her experience, and thus, Ms. Gentry is awarded her requested rate for 2025. The undersigned has also reviewed the submitted billing entries and finds the total number of hours billed to be reasonable and will award them in full. Lastly, the undersigned has reviewed the requested costs and finds them to be reasonable and supported with appropriate documentation. Accordingly, the full amount of costs shall be awarded. Therefore, the undersigned finds no cause to reduce the requested hours or rates, or the requested costs. The Vaccine Act permits an award of reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs. § 15(e). Based on the reasonableness of Petitioner’s request, the undersigned GRANTS Petitioner’s motion for attorneys’ fees and costs. Accordingly, the undersigned awards: Petitioner is awarded attorneys’ fees and costs in the total amount of $27,013.35, to be paid through an ACH deposit to Petitioner’s counsel’s IOLTA account for prompt disbursement. 2 In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the Clerk of Court SHALL ENTER JUDGMENT in accordance with this Decision. 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. /s/ Nora Beth Dorsey Nora Beth Dorsey Special Master 3 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment is expedited by the parties’ joint filing of notice renouncing the right to seek review. 3