BRIAN H. CORCORAN, Special Master.
On August 29, 2014, Michael McCollum filed a petition seeking compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program ("Vaccine Program").
Petitioner requested an interim award of attorney's fees and costs in November 2017, and I awarded him the sum total of $96,322.41, for work performed on the matter through the hearing date and up to the date of the interim request. Interim Fees Decision, dated Nov. 28, 2017 (ECF No. 58) ("Interim Fees Decision"). Now, Petitioner has interposed a final fees and costs request, seeking an additional award of $81,802.78 for all remaining work performed in this case (primarily associated with litigating the motion for review to the Court of Federal Claims, followed by the Federal Circuit appeal). Motion, dated June 13, 2019 (ECF No. 75) ("Final Fees Mot.").
As the pending motion indicates, Petitioner requests $73,664.60 for the work of two attorneys (Richard Gage and Kristen Blume) from early November 2017 through June 2019 and the preparation of the pending fees motion. Final Fees Mot. at 3-17 (Tabs A and B). For Mr. Gage, Petitioner requests $318 per hour for 2017 work; $326 per hour for 2018 work; and $338 for 2019 work. Id. at 21-25 (Tab D). For Ms. Blume, Petitioner asks for $251 per hour for 2017-18. Id. at 27-28 (Tab E). In addition, Petitioner seeks $3,120 in paralegal charges (id. at 30-33 (Tab F)), $2,313.11 in attorney costs (copying and travel for appellate oral arguments (id. at 35-46 (Tab G)), and $2,705.07 incurred by Petitioner personally in travel costs associated with the April 2017 entitlement hearing (id. at 48-56 (Tab H)). Respondent reacted to the Final Fees Motion on June 20, 2019, expressing satisfaction that the statutory requirements for a fees award had been met, but deferring the calculation of that award to my discretion. Response, dated June 20, 2019 (ECF No. 76).
Having reviewed Petitioner's Final Fees Motion and the documents filed in its support, I find that the motion is well-taken, and consistent with the determinations in my prior Interim Fees Decision. Although this claim was not successful, it had ample reasonable basis, was litigated in good faith, and raised complex issues of medicine and science upon which reasonable minds could differ, so fees are appropriate. Moreover, the rates requested are consistent with my Interim Fees Decision (as well as other recent relevant decisions),
Accordingly, in the exercise of the discretion afforded to me in determining the propriety of interim fees awards, and based on the foregoing, I