DECISION ON ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COSTS1

KATHERINE E. OLER, Special Master.

On October 13, 2017, Donald Jackson ("Petitioner") filed a petition for compensation pursuant to the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.2 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-10 to -34 (2012). Petitioner alleged that he developed peripheral neuropathy and polyarthralgia as a result of the influenza ("flu") vaccination that he received on October 14, 2015. Pet., ECF No. 1, at 1. On June 25, 2019, Petitioner filed a motion to voluntarily dismiss his petition, and on the same day the undersigned issued her Decision dismissing the petition for insufficient proof. Decision, ECF No. 32.

On August 19, 2019, Petitioner filed an application for final attorneys' fees and costs. ECF No. 35 ("Fees App."). Petitioner requests total attorneys' fees and costs in the amount of $10,717.63, representing $10,059.50 in attorneys' fees and $658.13 in attorneys' costs. Fees App. at 2. Pursuant to General Order No. 9, Petitioner states that he has not personally incurred any costs related to this case. Id. Respondent responded to the motion on August 30, 2019, deferring to the undersigned's discretion as to whether the statutory requirements for an award of attorney's fees and costs are met and, if so, to determine a reasonable amount of fees and costs. Resp't's Resp. at 2 (ECF No. 36). Petitioner did not file a reply thereafter.

This matter is now ripe for consideration.

I. Reasonable Attorneys' Fees and Costs

Section 15(e) (1) of the Vaccine Act allows for the Special Master to award "reasonable attorneys' fees, and other costs." § 300aa-15(e)(1)(A)-(B). Petitioners are entitled to an award of reasonable attorneys' fees and costs if they are entitled to compensation under the Vaccine Act, or, even if they are unsuccessful, they are eligible so long as the Special Master finds that the petition was filed in good faith and with a reasonable basis. Avera v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 515 F.3d 1343, 1352 (Fed. Cir. 2008). Here, the undersigned does not doubt that the petition was filed in good faith, and although the petition was eventually dismissed, the undersigned finds that there was reasonable basis to file the petition. Respondent has also not challenged the reasonable basis of the petitioner. Accordingly, a final award of fees and costs is appropriate.

It is "well within the special master's discretion" to determine the reasonableness of fees. Saxton v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 3 F.3d 1517, 1521-22 (Fed. Cir. 1993); see also Hines v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 22 Cl. Ct. 750, 753 (1991). ("[T]he reviewing court must grant the special master wide latitude in determining the reasonableness of both attorneys' fees and costs."). Applications for attorneys' fees must include contemporaneous and specific billing records that indicate the work performed and the number of hours spent on said work. See Savin v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 85 Fed. Cl. 313, 316-18 (2008).

Reasonable hourly rates are determined by looking at the "prevailing market rate" in the relevant community. See Blum v. Stenson, 465 U.S. 886, 895 (1984). The "prevailing market rate" is akin to the rate "in the community for similar services by lawyers of reasonably comparable skill, experience and reputation." Id. at 895, n.11. The petitioner bears the burden of providing adequate evidence to prove that the requested hourly rate is reasonable. Id.

a. Reasonable Hourly Rates

Petitioner requests the following hourly rates for the work of his counsel: for Ms. Shealene Mancuso, $225.00 per hour for work performed in 2017, $233.00 per hour for work performed in 2018, and $250.00 per hour for work performed in 2019; for Mr. Max Muller, $300.00 per hour for work performed in 2017; and for Mr. Paul Brazil, $325.00 per hour for work performed in 2019. Petitioner also requests paralegal rates from $125.00 per hour to $140.00 per hour, depending on the year and the paralegal. The undersigned has reviewed the requested rates and finds them to be consistent with what Muller Brazil, LLP attorneys and paralegals have previously been awarded for their Vaccine Program work. Accordingly, the rates sought herein are reasonable.

b. Reasonable Hours Expended

Attorneys' fees are awarded for the "number of hours reasonably expended on the litigation." Avera, 515 F.3d at 1348. Counsel should not include in their fee requests hours that are "excessive, redundant, or otherwise unnecessary." Saxton, 3 F.3d at 1521 (quoting Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424, 434 (1983)). Additionally, it is well-established that billing for administrative/clerical tasks is not permitted in the Vaccine Program. Rochester v. United States, 18 Cl. Ct. 379, 387 (1989); Arranga v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., No. 02-1616V, 2018 WL 2224959, at *3 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Apr. 12, 2018).

Upon review, the undersigned finds the overall hours billed to be reasonable. Counsel has provided sufficiently detailed descriptions for the tasks performed, and, upon review, the undersigned does not find any of the billing entries to be unreasonable. Respondent also did not indicate that he finds any of the billing entries to be unreasonable. Accordingly, Petitioner is entitled to final attorneys' fees in the amount of $10,059.50.

c. Attorneys' Costs

Like attorneys' fees, a request for reimbursement of attorneys' costs must be reasonable. Perreira v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 27 Fed. Cl. 29, 34 (Fed. Cl. 1992). Petitioner requests a total of $658.13 in attorneys' costs. This amount is comprised of acquiring medical records, and the Court's filing fee. Fees App. at 12. All of these costs are reasonable and have been supported by adequate documentation. Petitioner is therefore awarded the full amount of costs sought.

II. Conclusion

In accordance with the Vaccine Act, 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(e) (2012), the undersigned has reviewed the billing records and costs in this case and finds that Petitioner's request for fees and costs is reasonable. Based on the above analysis, the undersigned finds that it is reasonable to compensate Petitioner and his counsel as follows:

Accordingly, the undersigned awards the following:

In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the clerk of the court shall enter judgment in accordance herewith.3

IT IS SO ORDERED.