UNPUBLISHED

DECISION ON ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COSTS1

NORA BETH DORSEY, Chief Special Master.

On June 29, 2017, 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 his deceased father, Jack Damron, suffered the table injury of the Guillain-Barré Syndrome ("GBS") after receiving the seasonal influenza vaccine. Petition at 1. On May 23, 2018, the undersigned issued a decision awarding compensation to petitioner based on the respondent's proffer. (ECF No. 32).

On July 20, 2018, petitioner filed a motion for attorneys' fees and costs. (ECF No. 36). Petitioner requests attorneys' fees in the amount of $45,284.90 and attorneys' costs in the amount of $1,948.25. Id. at 1. Additionally, in compliance with General Order #9, petitioner filed a signed statement indicating that petitioner incurred $4,003.29 in out-of-pocket expenses. Id. at 3. Thus, the total amount requested is $47,233.15.

On July 23, 2018, respondent filed a response to petitioner's motion. (ECF No. 37). Respondent argues that "[n]either the Vaccine Act nor Vaccine Rule 13 contemplates any role for respondent in the resolution of a request by a petitioner for an award of attorneys' fees and costs." Id. at 1. Respondent adds, however, that he "is satisfied the statutory requirements for an award of attorneys' fees and costs are met in this case." Id. at 2. Respondent "respectfully recommends that the Chief Special Master exercise her discretion and determine a reasonable award for attorneys' fees and costs." Id. at 3.

Petitioner has filed no reply.

The undersigned has reviewed the billing records submitted with petitioner's request and finds a reduction in the amount of fees to be awarded appropriate due to billing for administrative tasks, excessive and duplicative billing, interoffice communication and block billing.

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 engaged 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).

Upon review of the records, a number of entries billed by the paralegals are for tasks better characterized as clerical or administrative. It is clearly established that secretarial work "should be considered as normal overhead office costs included within the attorneys' fee rates." Rochester v. U.S., 18 Cl. Ct. 379, 387 (1989); accord. Dingle v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., No. 08-579V, 2014 WL 630473, at *4 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Jan. 24, 2014). "[B]illing for clerical and other secretarial work is not permitted in the Vaccine Program." Mostovoy v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., No. 02-10V, 2016 WL 720969, at *5 (citing Rochester, 18 Cl. Ct. at 387). A total of 3.30 hours3 was billed on administrative tasks including, paying invoices, organizing documents, and scanning and saving documents.

The undersigned has previously reduced the fees paid to petitioners due to excessive and duplicative billing. See Ericzon v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., No. 10-103V, 2016 WL 447770 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Jan. 15, 2016) (reduced overall fee award by 10 percent due to excessive and duplicative billing); Raymo v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., No. 11-654V, 2016 WL 7212323 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Nov. 2, 2016) (reduced overall fee award by 20 percent), mot. for rev. denied, 129 Fed. Cl. 691 (2016). The undersigned and other special masters have previously noted the inefficiency that results when cases are staffed by multiple individuals and have reduced fees accordingly. See Sabella, 86 Fed. Cl. at 209. Over eighty entries4 are listed on tasks such as "interoffice conference", "conversation with ", "email to/from" and "correspondence with". Many entries containing these descriptions are block billed with tasks that are considered compensable and non-compensable. Due to the block billing5 the undersigned cannot decipher the amount of time spent on each task.

For the reasons listed above the undersigned reduces the total award of attorney's fees by 5 percent. This results in a reduction of $2,264.25.

The full amount of costs requested, $5,951.54, is awarded.

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 $44,968.906 as follows:

The clerk of the court shall enter judgment in accordance herewith.7

IT IS SO ORDERED.