Not to be published

DECISION GRANTING FINAL AWARD OF ATTORNEY'S FEES AND COSTS1

BRIAN H. CORCORAN, Special Master.

On August 4, 2017, Steven Dingmann ("Petitioner") filed a petition seeking compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program ("Vaccine Program").2 Petitioner alleged that he suffered from transverse myelitis as a result of his October 29, 2015 influenza vaccine. The parties filed a stipulation for damages on January 23, 2019, which I adopted as my Decision awarding damages on the same day. (ECF No. 32).

Petitioner has now filed a motion requesting final attorneys' fees and costs, dated January 31, 2019 (ECF No. 35) ("Fees App."), requesting a total award of $51,617.90 (representing $34,748.20 in attorneys' fees, plus $16,869.70 in costs). Fees App. at 2. In addition, pursuant to General Order No. 9, Petitioner warrants that he has personally incurred costs of $5.00 in pursuit of this litigation. Id. Respondent reacted to the motion on February 6, 2019, indicating that he is satisfied that the statutory requirements for an award of attorney's fees and costs are met in this case, and deferring to my discretion to determine the amount to be awarded. Response, ECF No. 32, at 2-3. Petitioner filed a reply on February 7, 2019, reiterating his belief that the requested amount of fees and costs is reasonable. Reply, ECF No. 39, at 2.

For the reasons set forth below, I hereby GRANT Petitioner's motion, awarding final attorneys' fees and costs in the amount of $51,622.90.

ANALYSIS

Vaccine Program attorneys are entitled to a fees award in successful cases like this one. Determining the appropriate amount of that award is a two-part process. The first part involves application of the lodestar method — "multiplying the number of hours reasonably expended on the litigation times a reasonable hourly rate." Avera v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 515 F.3d 1343, 1347-48 (Fed. Cir. 2008) (quoting Blum v. Stenson, 465 U.S. 886, 888 (1984)).3 The second part involves adjusting the lodestar calculation up or down to take relevant factors into consideration. Avera, 515 F.3d at 1348. This standard for calculating a fee award is considered applicable in most cases where a fee award is authorized by federal statute. Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424, 429-37 (1983).

Petitioner requests the following rates of compensation for his attorney, Mr. Isaiah Kalinowski: $349.00 per hour for work performed in 2016, $358.00 per hour for work performed in 2017, $368.00 per hour for work performed in 2018, and $383.00 per hour for work performed in 2019. Fees App. Ex. 1 at 18. Petitioner also requests rates for paralegals ranging from $135.00 per hour to $154.00 per hour, depending on the year of work performed. Id. These rates are consistent with what I and other special masters have awarded Mr. Kalinowski for his work over the past several years, and also consistent with the Office of Special Masters fee schedule.4 Accordingly, no adjustment to the rates is necessary.

The hours expended on this matter as reflected in the billing entries are also reasonable. The billing entries describe with sufficient detail the task being performed and the time spent on each task. Respondent has not identified any particular entries as objectionable and upon review, I did not find any entries to be objectionable either. Accordingly, Petitioner is entitled to the full amount of attorney's fees sought: $34,748.20.

I will next turn to costs. Just as they are required to establish the reasonableness of requested fees, petitioners must also demonstrate that requested litigation costs are reasonable. Perreira v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 27 Fed. Cl. 29, 34 (Fed. Cl. 1992); Presault v. United States, 52 Fed. Cl. 667, 670 (Fed. Cl. 2002). Reasonable costs include the costs of obtaining medical records and expert time incurred while working on a case. Fester v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., No. 10-243V, 2013 WL 5367670, at *16 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Aug. 27, 2013). When petitioners fail to carry their burden, such as by not providing appropriate documentation to substantiate a requested cost, special masters have refrained from awarding compensation. See, e.g., Gardner-Cook v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., No. 99-480V, 2005 WL 6122520, at *4 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. June 30, 2005).

Petitioner requests $16,869.70 in overall costs. Most of this amount ($15,125.00) is for the work of Petitioner's exert, Dr. Jeffery Allen, for review of medical records and medical literature and preparation of an expert report. Fees App. Ex 2 at 27. In total, Dr. Allen billed 30.25 hours at a rate of $500.00 per hour. Dr. Allen made sufficiently detailed billing entries and I find the overall work performed in this case and the overall amount charged to be reasonable. Accordingly, I will reimburse the costs associated with Dr. Allen's expert work in full.5 The remainder of the costs requested are for medical records, travel expenses, postage costs, the Court's filing fee. All of these costs are typical of vaccine program litigation, and Petitioner has supported them with adequate documentation. Accordingly, Petitioner is entitled to the full amount of costs requested.

Finally, pursuant to General Order No. 9, Petitioner warrants that he has personally incurred costs in the amount of $5.00 for a notary fee. Petitioner has supported this cost with adequate documentation and it shall be reimbursed.

CONCLUSION

The Vaccine Act permits an award of reasonable attorney's fees and costs. 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(e). Accordingly, I award a total of $51,617.90 as a lump sum in the form of a check jointly payable to Petitioner and his counsel, Mr. Isaiah Kalinowski, Esq., and a total of $5.00 as a lump sum in the form of a check made payable to Petitioner. In the absence of a timely-filed motion for review (see Appendix B to the Rules of the Court), the Clerk shall enter judgment in accordance with this decision.6

IT IS SO ORDERED.