In the United States Court of Federal Claims
                                 OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
                                          No. 18-0394V
                                      Filed: June 17, 2019
                                         UNPUBLISHED


    JAY LAMONT,

                        Petitioner,
    v.                                                       Special Processing Unit (SPU);
                                                             Attorneys’ Fees and Costs
    SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND
    HUMAN SERVICES,

                       Respondent.


Paul R. Brazil, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA, for petitioner.
Voris Edward Johnson, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

                      DECISION ON ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS 1

Dorsey, Chief Special Master:

        On March 14, 2018, Jay Lamont (“petitioner”) filed a petition for compensation
under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et
seq., 2 (the “Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleges that he suffered right shoulder injuries as a
result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccine he received on September 23, 2016. Petition at 1.
On May 21, 2019, the undersigned issued a decision awarding compensation to
petitioner based on the parties’ stipulation. ECF No. 29.

      On May 31, 2019, petitioner filed a motion for attorneys’ fees and costs. ECF
No. 33. Petitioner requests attorneys’ fees in the amount of $9,155.30 and attorneys’

1 The undersigned intends to post this decision on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website.
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. Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the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 in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal
Management and Promotion of Electronic Government Services).

2
 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755. Hereinafter, for
ease of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. §
300aa (2012).
costs in the amount of $9,692.89. 

In accordance with General Order #9,
petitioner's counsel represents that petitioner incurred no out-of-pocket expenses. 

Thus, the total amount requested is $9,692.89.

        On June 3, 2019, respondent filed a response to petitioner’s motion. ECF No.
34. Respondent does not object to the overall amount sought.” 

Respondent’s
lack of objection to the amount sought in this case should not be construed as
admission, concession, or waiver as to the hourly rates requested, the number of hours
billed, or the other litigation related costs.” 

correspondence on June 3, 2019, petitioner, through counsel, notified
the undersigned he did not intend to file a reply.

        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 the total of $9,692.89 3 as a lump sum
in the form of a check jointly payable to petitioner and petitioner’s counsel Paul
R. Brazil.

        The clerk of the court shall enter judgment in accordance herewith. 4

IT IS SO ORDERED.

                                                           s/Nora Beth Dorsey
                                                           Nora Beth Dorsey
                                                           Chief Special Master




3 This amount is intended to cover all legal expenses incurred in this matter. This award encompasses all

charges by the attorney against a client, “advanced costs” as well as fees for legal services rendered.
Furthermore, § 15(e)(3) prevents an attorney from charging or collecting fees (including costs) that would
be in addition to the amount awarded herein. See generally Beck v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs.,

(Fed. Cir.1991).
4 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