VICP Registry Case Source Bundle Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_24-vv-01427 Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_24-vv-01427 Petitioner: Sarah Walsh Filed: 2024-09-12 Decided: 2025-05-19 Vaccine: influenza Vaccination date: 2023-12-08 Condition: shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) Outcome: compensated Award amount USD: 42688.27 AI-assisted case summary: On September 12, 2024, Sarah Walsh filed a petition alleging that an influenza vaccination administered on December 8, 2023 caused a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration. She alleged that the vaccine was administered in the United States, that the injury lasted more than six months, and that no other compensation or civil action had resolved the injury. Respondent conceded entitlement in April 2025, agreeing that Ms. Walsh's injury was consistent with Table SIRVA. Chief Special Master Corcoran granted entitlement on April 25, 2025. The public documents do not describe Ms. Walsh's first symptom, medical visits, imaging, injections, physical therapy, or work and daily-life consequences. Damages were resolved by proffer. On May 19, 2025, the Chief Special Master awarded $42,688.27 as a lump sum through counsel, consisting of $42,500.00 for pain and suffering and $188.27 for past unreimbursable expenses. A later fee decision was separate from injury compensation. Theory of causation field: Adult petitioner; influenza vaccine December 8, 2023; Table SIRVA. COMPENSATED. Respondent conceded entitlement; public text lacks detailed clinical chronology. Entitlement April 25, 2025; damages May 19, 2025. Award $42,688.27 = $42,500.00 pain/suffering + $188.27 expenses. Petition filed September 12, 2024. Public staged source text: ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_24-vv-01427-0 Date issued/filed: 2025-05-29 Pages: 2 Docket text: PUBLIC ORDER/RULING (Originally filed: 04/25/2025) regarding 21 Ruling on Entitlement Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. (ppa) Service on parties made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:24-vv-01427-UNJ Document 33 Filed 05/29/25 Page 1 of 2 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 24-1427V SARAH WALSH, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: April 25, 2025 v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Daniel Alholm, Alholm Law PC, Chicago, IL, for Petitioner. Elizabeth Andary, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1 On September 12, 2024, Sarah Walsh 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 that she suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) resulting from an influenza vaccine received on December 8, 2023. Petition at 1. Petitioner further alleges that the vaccine was administered in the United States, her injury has lasted for more than six months, and neither Petitioner, nor any other party, has ever filed any action or received compensation in the form of an award or settlement, for Petitioner’s vaccine related injury. Petition at ¶¶ 2, 11-13. 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 1:24-vv-01427-UNJ Document 33 Filed 05/29/25 Page 2 of 2 On April 24, 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 in that “petitioner had no history of pain, inflammation, or dysfunction of her right shoulder prior to vaccination; pain occurred within forty-eight hours after receipt of an intramuscular vaccination; pain and reduced range of motion [were] 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 3. Respondent further agrees that the records demonstrate that Petitioner suffered residual effects of her condition for more than six months and has satisfied all legal prerequisites for compensation under the Vaccine Act. Id. In view of Respondent’s position and the evidence of record, I find that Petitioner is entitled to compensation. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Brian H. Corcoran Brian H. Corcoran Chief Special Master 2 ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 2: USCOURTS-cofc-1_24-vv-01427-cl-extra-11061529 Date issued/filed: 2025-05-29 Pages: 1 Docket text: Supplementary opinion from CourtListener cluster 10594941 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 24-1427V SARAH WALSH, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: April 25, 2025 v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Daniel Alholm, Alholm Law PC, Chicago, IL, for Petitioner. Elizabeth Andary, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1 On September 12, 2024, Sarah Walsh 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 that she suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) resulting from an influenza vaccine received on December 8, 2023. Petition at 1. Petitioner further alleges that the vaccine was administered in the United States, her injury has lasted for more than six months, and neither Petitioner, nor any other party, has ever filed any action or received compensation in the form of an award or settlement, for Petitioner’s vaccine related injury. Petition at ¶¶ 2, 11-13. 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 April 24, 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 in that “petitioner had no history of pain, inflammation, or dysfunction of her right shoulder prior to vaccination; pain occurred within forty-eight hours after receipt of an intramuscular vaccination; pain and reduced range of motion [were] 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 3. Respondent further agrees that the records demonstrate that Petitioner suffered residual effects of her condition for more than six months and has satisfied all legal prerequisites for compensation under the Vaccine Act. Id. In view of Respondent’s position and the evidence of record, I find that Petitioner is entitled to compensation. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Brian H. Corcoran Brian H. Corcoran Chief Special Master 2 ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 3: USCOURTS-cofc-1_24-vv-01427-1 Date issued/filed: 2025-06-20 Pages: 5 Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 05/19/2025) regarding 26 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer, Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. (ppa) Service on parties made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:24-vv-01427-UNJ Document 35 Filed 06/20/25 Page 1 of 5 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 24-1427V SARAH WALSH, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: May 19, 2025 v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Daniel Alholm, Alholm Law PC, Chicago, IL, for Petitioner. Elizabeth Andary, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1 On September 12, 2024, Sarah Walsh 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 that she suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) resulting from an influenza vaccine received on December 8, 2023. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters. On April 25, 2025, a ruling on entitlement was issued, finding Petitioner entitled to compensation for SIRVA. On May 19, 2025, Respondent filed a proffer on award of compensation (“Proffer”) indicating Petitioner should be awarded $42,688.27. 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. 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-01427-UNJ Document 35 Filed 06/20/25 Page 2 of 5 Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Proffer, I award Petitioner a lump sum payment of $42,688.27 (comprised of $42,500.00 for pain and suffering and $188.27 for past unreimbursable expenses), to be paid through an ACH deposit to Petitioner’s counsel’s IOLTA account for prompt disbursement 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 1:24-vv-01427-UNJ Document 35 Filed 06/20/25 Page 3 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS SARAH WALSH, Petitioner, v. No. 24-1427V Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND ECF HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. RESPONDENT’S PROFFER ON AWARD OF COMPENSATION On September 12, 2024, Sarah Walsh (“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”), as amended, alleging that she suffered a Table shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”), as the result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccination received on December 8, 2023. Petition at 1. On April 24, 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. ECF No. 20. On April 25, 2025, the Chief Special Master issued a Ruling on Entitlement finding petitioner entitled to compensation. ECF No. 21. I. Items of Compensation A. Pain and Suffering Based upon the evidence of record, respondent proffers that petitioner should be awarded a lump sum of $42,500.00 for pain and suffering. Petitioner agrees. Case 1:24-vv-01427-UNJ Document 35 Filed 06/20/25 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 $188.27. 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 $42,688.27, to be paid through an ACH deposit to petitioner’s counsel’s IOLTA account for prompt disbursement to petitioner. III. Summary of Recommended Payment Following Judgment Lump sum payable to petitioner, Sarah Walsh: $42,688.27 Respectfully submitted, YAAKOV M. ROTH Acting Assistant Attorney General C. SALVATORE D’ALESSIO 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, unreimbursed expenses, future lost earnings and future pain and suffering. 2 Case 1:24-vv-01427-UNJ Document 35 Filed 06/20/25 Page 5 of 5 HEATHER L. PEARLMAN Deputy Director Torts Branch, Civil Division TRACI R. PATTON Assistant Director Torts Branch, Civil Division /s/ ELIZABETH A. ANDARY ELIZABETH A. ANDARY 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) 616-9824 E-mail: Elizabeth.A.Andary@usdoj.gov Dated: May 19, 2025 3 ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 4: USCOURTS-cofc-1_24-vv-01427-cl-extra-11081136 Date issued/filed: 2025-06-20 Pages: 1 Docket text: Supplementary opinion from CourtListener cluster 10614548 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 24-1427V SARAH WALSH, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: May 19, 2025 v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Daniel Alholm, Alholm Law PC, Chicago, IL, for Petitioner. Elizabeth Andary, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1 On September 12, 2024, Sarah Walsh 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 that she suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) resulting from an influenza vaccine received on December 8, 2023. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters. On April 25, 2025, a ruling on entitlement was issued, finding Petitioner entitled to compensation for SIRVA. On May 19, 2025, Respondent filed a proffer on award of compensation (“Proffer”) indicating Petitioner should be awarded $42,688.27. 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. 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). Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Proffer, I award Petitioner a lump sum payment of $42,688.27 (comprised of $42,500.00 for pain and suffering and $188.27 for past unreimbursable expenses), to be paid through an ACH deposit to Petitioner’s counsel’s IOLTA account for prompt disbursement 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 SARAH WALSH, Petitioner, v. No. 24-1427V Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND ECF HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. RESPONDENT’S PROFFER ON AWARD OF COMPENSATION On September 12, 2024, Sarah Walsh (“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”), as amended, alleging that she suffered a Table shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”), as the result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccination received on December 8, 2023. Petition at 1. On April 24, 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. ECF No. 20. On April 25, 2025, the Chief Special Master issued a Ruling on Entitlement finding petitioner entitled to compensation. ECF No. 21. I. Items of Compensation A. Pain and Suffering Based upon the evidence of record, respondent proffers that petitioner should be awarded a lump sum of $42,500.00 for pain and suffering. 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 $188.27. 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 $42,688.27, to be paid through an ACH deposit to petitioner’s counsel’s IOLTA account for prompt disbursement to petitioner. III. Summary of Recommended Payment Following Judgment Lump sum payable to petitioner, Sarah Walsh: $42,688.27 Respectfully submitted, YAAKOV M. ROTH Acting Assistant Attorney General C. SALVATORE D’ALESSIO 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, unreimbursed expenses, future lost earnings and future pain and suffering. 2 HEATHER L. PEARLMAN Deputy Director Torts Branch, Civil Division TRACI R. PATTON Assistant Director Torts Branch, Civil Division /s/ ELIZABETH A. ANDARY ELIZABETH A. ANDARY 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) 616-9824 E-mail: Elizabeth.A.Andary@usdoj.gov Dated: May 19, 2025 3 ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 5: USCOURTS-cofc-1_24-vv-01427-cl-extra-11137297 Date issued/filed: 2025-09-12 Pages: 1 Docket text: Supplementary opinion from CourtListener cluster 10670710 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 24-1427V SARAH WALSH, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: August 6, 2025 v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Daniel Alholm, Alholm Law PC, Chicago, IL, for Petitioner. Elizabeth Andary, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION ON ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS 1 On September 12, 2024, Sarah Walsh 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 following an influenza vaccine she received on December 8, 2023. Petition, ECF No. 1. On April 25, 2025, I issued a ruling on entitlement finding the Petitioner entitled to compensation. ECF No. 21. On May 19, 2025, I issued a decision awarding compensation to Petitioner based on the Respondent’s proffer. ECF No. 26. 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). Petitioner has now filed a motion for attorney’s fees and costs, requesting an award of $20,265.11 (representing $19,197.50 in fees plus $1,067.61 in costs). Application for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs (“Motion”) filed May 21, 2025, ECF No. 31. Furthermore, Petitioner filed a signed statement representing that no personal out-of-pocket expenses were incurred. ECF 31-4 at 2. Respondent reacted to the motion on May 29, 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. Response at 2, 4. ECF No. 32. Petitioner indicated thereafter that she does not intend to file a substantive reply. ECF No. 34. 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. 2 Petitioner’s counsel “should make a good faith effort to exclude from a fee request hours that are excessive, redundant, or otherwise unnecessary, just as a lawyer in private practice ethically is obligated to exclude such hours from his fee submission.” Hensley, 461 U.S. at 434. ATTORNEY FEES 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, some of the tasks performed by attorney Daniel Alholm 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. In evaluating a motion for attorney’s fees and costs, special masters “need not, and indeed should not, become green-eyeshade accountants.” Fox v. Vice, 563 U.S. 826, 838, 131 S.Ct. 2205, 180 L.Ed.2d 45 (2011). Instead, in appropriate circumstances they may make reasonable, across-the-board percentage adjustments. Here, such an overall percentage cut is reasonable, and preferrable to a time- consuming line-by-line review of the bill. I therefore reduce the total fees to be awarded herein by five percent as a fair adjustment to account for the paralegal duties issue mentioned. Application of the foregoing reduces the total amount of fees to be awarded by $959.87.4 3 Entries considered paralegal in nature include drafting requests for medical records, following up on medical records requests, bates stamping documents, 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. Entries that include paralegal tasks billed at an attorney rate include, but are not limited to, the following: 9/12/2024 (two entries), 10/8/2024, 10/10/2024, 12/4/2024, 5/12/2025, 5/19/2025. ECF 31-2 at 2-7. 4 This amount is calculated as follows: $19,197.50 x 0.05 = $959.87. 3 Petitioner has otherwise provided supporting documentation for all claimed costs. ECF 31-3 at 2-8. 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 $19,305.24 (representing $18,237.63 in fees plus $1,067.61 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.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