VICP Registry Case Source Bundle Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_24-vv-01170 Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_24-vv-01170 Petitioner: Michael Gross Filed: 2024-07-31 Decided: 2025-07-17 Vaccine: influenza Vaccination date: 2023-09-22 Condition: shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) Outcome: compensated Award amount USD: 57500 AI-assisted case summary: On July 31, 2024, Michael Gross filed a petition alleging that an influenza vaccine administered on September 22, 2023 caused a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration. Respondent conceded entitlement, agreeing that Mr. Gross's injury was consistent with Table SIRVA and that he met the legal prerequisites for compensation. The public entitlement and damages documents do not describe the first symptom, treatment visits, imaging, injections, therapy, or residual limitations. Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran found entitlement on May 15, 2025. On July 17, 2025, he awarded $57,500.00 for pain and suffering as a lump sum through counsel's IOLTA account. Theory of causation field: Influenza vaccine September 22, 2023 causing Table SIRVA; adult, exact age not stated. ENTITLEMENT CONCEDED; COMPENSATED. Public documents lack treatment chronology. Award $57,500 pain/suffering. Chief SM Brian H. Corcoran; petition July 31, 2024; entitlement May 15, 2025; damages July 17, 2025. Public staged source text: ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_24-vv-01170-0 Date issued/filed: 2025-06-25 Pages: 2 Docket text: PUBLIC ORDER/RULING (Originally filed: 05/15/2025) regarding 26 Ruling on Entitlement ( Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. )(mpj) Service on parties made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:24-vv-01170-UNJ Document 29 Filed 06/25/25 Page 1 of 2 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 24-1170V MICHAEL GROSS, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, v. Filed: May 15, 2025 SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Jonathan Joseph Svitak, Shannon Law Group, P.C., Woodridge, IL, for Petitioner. Dima Jawad Atiya, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1 On July 31, 2024, Michael Gross 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 he suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) as the result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccination received on September 22, 2023. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters. On May 14, 2025, 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. Id. at 3 – 4 (citing 42 C.F.R. §§ 100.3(a), 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 1:24-vv-01170-UNJ Document 29 Filed 06/25/25 Page 2 of 2 (c)(10)). Respondent further agrees that Petitioner has satisfied all legal prerequisites for compensation under the Vaccine Act. Id. at 4 (internal citations omitted). 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_24-vv-01170-cl-extra-11083621 Date issued/filed: 2025-06-25 Pages: 1 Docket text: Supplementary opinion from CourtListener cluster 10617033 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 24-1170V MICHAEL GROSS, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, v. Filed: May 15, 2025 SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Jonathan Joseph Svitak, Shannon Law Group, P.C., Woodridge, IL, for Petitioner. Dima Jawad Atiya, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1 On July 31, 2024, Michael Gross 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 he suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) as the result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccination received on September 22, 2023. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters. On May 14, 2025, 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. Id. at 3 – 4 (citing 42 C.F.R. §§ 100.3(a), 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). (c)(10)). Respondent further agrees that Petitioner has satisfied all legal prerequisites for compensation under the Vaccine Act. Id. at 4 (internal citations omitted). 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_24-vv-01170-1 Date issued/filed: 2025-08-19 Pages: 5 Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 07/17/2025) regarding 31 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer ( Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. )(mpj) Service on parties made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:24-vv-01170-UNJ Document 37 Filed 08/19/25 Page 1 of 5 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 24-1170V MICHAEL GROSS, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, v. Filed: July 17, 2025 SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Jonathan Joseph Svitak, Shannon Law Group, P.C., Woodridge, IL, for Petitioner. Dima Jawad Atiya, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION ON DAMAGES1 On July 31, 2024, Michael Gross 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 he suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) as the result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccination received on September 22, 2023. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters. On May 15, 2025, a Ruling on Entitlement was issued, finding Petitioner entitled to compensation for a SIRVA. On July 16, 2025, Respondent filed a Proffer on award of compensation (“Proffer”). Respondent represented that Petitioner agrees with the 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 1:24-vv-01170-UNJ Document 37 Filed 08/19/25 Page 2 of 5 proffered award. Id. at 1. 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, Petitioner is awarded a lump sum of $57,500.00 (for pain and suffering) to be paid through an ACH deposit to Petitioner’s counsel’s IOLTA account for prompt disbursement to Petitioner. Proffer at 1. This amount represents compensation for all damages that would be available under Section 15(a). Id. 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 1:24-vv-01170-UNJ Document 37 Filed 08/19/25 Page 3 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS ) MICHAEL GROSS, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) No. 24-1170V v. ) Chief Special Master Corcoran ) ECF SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN ) SERVICES, ) ) Respondent. ) ) RESPONDENT’S PROFFER ON AWARD OF COMPENSATION On July 31, 2024, Michael Gross (“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 he suffered a Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (“SIRVA”), as defined in the Vaccine Injury Table, following administration of an influenza vaccine he received on September 22, 2023.1 Petition at 1. On May 14, 2025, 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 following the influenza vaccine, and on May 15, 2025, the Chief Special Master issued a Ruling on Entitlement finding petitioner entitled to compensation. ECF No. 23; ECF No. 26. 1 On September 22, 2023, petitioner also received a COVID-19 vaccine. Vaccines against COVID-19 are not contained in the Vaccine Injury Table. See 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-14 and 42 C.F.R. § 100.3(a). Pursuant to the declaration issued by the Secretary of Health and Human Services under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (42 U.S.C. §§ 247d-6d, 247d-6e), claims for alleged injuries from COVID-19 countermeasures, including vaccines, may be compensable under the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (“CICP”). See 85 Fed. Reg. 15198, 15202 (March 17, 2020) Case 1:24-vv-01170-UNJ Document 37 Filed 08/19/25 Page 4 of 5 I. Item of Compensation A. Pain and Suffering Respondent proffers that petitioner should be awarded $57,500.00 in pain and suffering. See 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a)(4). Petitioner agrees. This amount represents all elements of compensation to which petitioner is entitled under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). Petitioner agrees.2 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 following3: a lump sum payment of $57,500.00, to be paid through an ACH deposit to petitioner’s counsel’s IOLTA account for prompt disbursement to petitioner. Respectfully submitted, BRETT A. SHUMATE Assistant Attorney General 2 The entry of judgment awarding the compensation described herein in a Decision of the Special Master, resolves any and all actions or causes of action (including agreements, judgments, claims, damages, loss of services, expenses and all demands of whatever kind or nature) that have been brought, could have been brought, or hereafter could be timely brought against the United States and the Secretary of Health and Human Services in the Court of Federal Claims, under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-10 et seq., (a) on account of, or in any way growing out of any and all known or unknown, suspected or unsuspected personal injuries to or death of petitioner that resulted from, or that may be alleged to have resulted from, the vaccinations identified herein, and (b) that petitioner has had, now has, or hereafter may have with respect to the injury that gave rise to the petition for vaccine compensation filed in the United States Court of Federal Claims as petition No. 24-1170V. 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 Case 1:24-vv-01170-UNJ Document 37 Filed 08/19/25 Page 5 of 5 C. SALVATORE D’ALESSIO Director Torts Branch, Civil Division HEATHER L. PEARLMAN Deputy Director Torts Branch, Civil Division VORIS E. JOHNSON Assistant Director Torts Branch, Civil Division /s/ Dima J. Atiya DIMA JAWAD ATIYA 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) 616-9355 Dima.Atiya@usdoj.gov DATED: July 16, 2025 3 ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 4: USCOURTS-cofc-1_24-vv-01170-cl-extra-11123239 Date issued/filed: 2025-08-19 Pages: 1 Docket text: Supplementary opinion from CourtListener cluster 10656652 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 24-1170V MICHAEL GROSS, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, v. Filed: July 17, 2025 SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Jonathan Joseph Svitak, Shannon Law Group, P.C., Woodridge, IL, for Petitioner. Dima Jawad Atiya, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION ON DAMAGES1 On July 31, 2024, Michael Gross 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 he suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) as the result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccination received on September 22, 2023. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters. On May 15, 2025, a Ruling on Entitlement was issued, finding Petitioner entitled to compensation for a SIRVA. On July 16, 2025, Respondent filed a Proffer on award of compensation (“Proffer”). Respondent represented that Petitioner agrees with the 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). proffered award. Id. at 1. 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, Petitioner is awarded a lump sum of $57,500.00 (for pain and suffering) to be paid through an ACH deposit to Petitioner’s counsel’s IOLTA account for prompt disbursement to Petitioner. Proffer at 1. This amount represents compensation for all damages that would be available under Section 15(a). Id. 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 ) MICHAEL GROSS, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) No. 24-1170V v. ) Chief Special Master Corcoran ) ECF SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN ) SERVICES, ) ) Respondent. ) ) RESPONDENT’S PROFFER ON AWARD OF COMPENSATION On July 31, 2024, Michael Gross (“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 he suffered a Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (“SIRVA”), as defined in the Vaccine Injury Table, following administration of an influenza vaccine he received on September 22, 2023. 1 Petition at 1. On May 14, 2025, 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 following the influenza vaccine, and on May 15, 2025, the Chief Special Master issued a Ruling on Entitlement finding petitioner entitled to compensation. ECF No. 23; ECF No. 26. 1 On September 22, 2023, petitioner also received a COVID-19 vaccine. Vaccines against COVID-19 are not contained in the Vaccine Injury Table. See 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-14 and 42 C.F.R. § 100.3(a). Pursuant to the declaration issued by the Secretary of Health and Human Services under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (42 U.S.C. §§ 247d-6d, 247d-6e), claims for alleged injuries from COVID-19 countermeasures, including vaccines, may be compensable under the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (“CICP”). See 85 Fed. Reg. 15198, 15202 (March 17, 2020) I. Item of Compensation A. Pain and Suffering Respondent proffers that petitioner should be awarded $57,500.00 in pain and suffering. See 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a)(4). Petitioner agrees. This amount represents all elements of compensation to which petitioner is entitled under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). Petitioner agrees. 2 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 3: a lump sum payment of $57,500.00, to be paid through an ACH deposit to petitioner’s counsel’s IOLTA account for prompt disbursement to petitioner. Respectfully submitted, BRETT A. SHUMATE Assistant Attorney General 2 The entry of judgment awarding the compensation described herein in a Decision of the Special Master, resolves any and all actions or causes of action (including agreements, judgments, claims, damages, loss of services, expenses and all demands of whatever kind or nature) that have been brought, could have been brought, or hereafter could be timely brought against the United States and the Secretary of Health and Human Services in the Court of Federal Claims, under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-10 et seq., (a) on account of, or in any way growing out of any and all known or unknown, suspected or unsuspected personal injuries to or death of petitioner that resulted from, or that may be alleged to have resulted from, the vaccinations identified herein, and (b) that petitioner has had, now has, or hereafter may have with respect to the injury that gave rise to the petition for vaccine compensation filed in the United States Court of Federal Claims as petition No. 24-1170V. 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 C. SALVATORE D’ALESSIO Director Torts Branch, Civil Division HEATHER L. PEARLMAN Deputy Director Torts Branch, Civil Division VORIS E. JOHNSON Assistant Director Torts Branch, Civil Division /s/ Dima J. Atiya DIMA JAWAD ATIYA 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) 616-9355 Dima.Atiya@usdoj.gov DATED: July 16, 2025 3 ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 5: USCOURTS-cofc-1_24-vv-01170-cl-extra-11202568 Date issued/filed: 2025-11-13 Pages: 1 Docket text: Supplementary opinion from CourtListener cluster 10735983 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 24-1170V MICHAEL GROSS, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: October 14, 2025 v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Jonathan Joseph Svitak, Shannon Law Group, P.C., Woodridge, IL, for Petitioner. Dima Jawad Atiya, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION ON ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS 1 On July 31, 2024, Michael Gross 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 he suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration following an influenza vaccine he received on September 22, 2023. Petition, ECF No. 1. On July 17, 2025, I issued a decision awarding compensation to Petitioner based on the Respondent’s proffer. ECF No. 31. 1Because this Decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action taken in this case, it must be made publicly accessible and will be posted on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, and/or at https://www.govinfo.gov/app/collection/uscourts/national/cofc, in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2018) (Federal Management and Promotion of Electronic Government Services). This means the Decision will be available to anyone with access to the internet. In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), Petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to redact medical or other information, the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, I agree that the identified material fits within this definition, I will redact such material from public access. 2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755. Hereinafter, for ease of citation, all section references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa (2018). Petitioner has now filed a motion for attorney’s fees and costs, requesting an award of $24,623.33 (representing $23,038.00 in fees plus $1,585.33 in costs). Application for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs (“Motion”) filed July 23, 2025, ECF No. 35. Furthermore, counsel for Petitioner represents that no personal out-of-pocket expenses were incurred by Petitioner. ECF No. 35 at 2. Respondent reacted to the motion on July 30, 2025, 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. 36. Petitioner filed no reply thereafter. I have reviewed the billing records submitted with Petitioner’s request and find a reduction in the amount of fees to be awarded appropriate, for the reason listed below. ANALYSIS The Vaccine Act permits an award of reasonable attorney’s fees and costs for successful claimants. Section 15(e). Counsel must submit fee requests that include contemporaneous and specific billing records indicating the service performed, the number of hours expended on the service, and the name of the person performing the service. See Savin v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 85 Fed. Cl. 313, 316-18 (2008). Counsel should not include in their fee requests hours that are “excessive, redundant, or otherwise unnecessary.” Saxton v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 3 F.3d 1517, 1521 (Fed. Cir. 1993) (quoting Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424, 434 (1983)). It is “well within the special master’s discretion to reduce the hours to a number that, in [her] experience and judgment, [is] reasonable for the work done.” Id. at 1522. Furthermore, the special master may reduce a fee request sua sponte, apart from objections raised by respondent and without providing a petitioner notice and opportunity to respond. See Sabella v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 86 Fed. Cl. 201, 209 (2009). A special master need not engage in a line-by-line analysis of petitioner’s fee application when reducing fees. Broekelschen v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 102 Fed. Cl. 719, 729 (2011). The petitioner “bears the burden of establishing the hours expended, the rates charged, and the expenses incurred.” Wasson v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 24 Cl. Ct. 482, 484 (1991). The Petitioner “should present adequate proof [of the attorney’s fees and costs sought] at the time of the submission.” Wasson, 24 Cl. Ct. at 484 n.1. 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 I have reviewed the billing records submitted with Petitioner’s request. The rates requested for work performed through 2025 are reasonable and consistent with our prior determinations and are hereby awarded herein. However, a few of the tasks performed by attorney Jonathan Svitak in this matter are more properly billed using a paralegal rate. 3 “Tasks that can be completed by a paralegal or a legal assistant should not be billed at an attorney’s rate.” Riggins v. Sec’y of Health & Hum. Servs., No. 99-382V, 2009 WL 3319818, at *21 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. June 15, 2009). “[T]he rate at which such work is compensated turns not on who ultimately performed the task but instead turns on the nature of the task performed.” Doe/11 v. Sec’y of Health & Hum. Servs., No. XX-XXXXV, 2010 WL 529425, at *9 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Jan. 29, 2010). Although these billing entries reflect reasonably performed tasks, they must be charged at a reduced rate comparable to that of a paralegal. Application of the foregoing reduces the amount of fees to be awarded by $87.70. 4 ATTORNEY COSTS Petitioner has otherwise provided supporting documentation for all claimed costs. ECF No. 35-4 at 1-11. 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. Petitioner is awarded attorneys’ fees and costs in the total amount of $24,535.63 (representing $22,950.30 in fees plus $1,585.33 in 3 Entries considered paralegal in nature include drafting requests for medical records, following up on medical records requests and drafting basic documents such as an exhibit list, PAR questionnaire, notice of filing, notice of intent, statement of completion, cover sheet, joint notice not to seek review. See billing entries dated: 5/22/2024, 12/16/2024, 7/22/2025. ECF No. 35-2 at 1-16. 4 This amount is calculated as follows: ($410.00 - $197.00 = $213.00 x 0.30 hrs.) + ($450.00 - $212.00 = $238.00 x 0.10 hrs.) = $87.70. 3 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. 5 IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Brian H. Corcoran Brian H. Corcoran Chief Special Master 5 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties may expedite entry of judgment by filing a joint notice renouncing their right to seek review. 4