In the United States Court of Federal Claims
                                   OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
                                           No. 18-0866V
                                        (not to be published)


    ELIZABETH MCCANN,
                                                                Chief Special Master Corcoran
                         Petitioner,
    v.                                                          Filed: December 30, 2019


    SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND                                     Special Processing Unit                 (SPU);
    HUMAN SERVICES,                                             Attorney’s Fees and Costs


                         Respondent.


Bridget Candace McCullough, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA, for Petitioner.

Christine Mary Becer, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

                       DECISION ON ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS 1

      On June 19, 2018, Elizabeth McCann (“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 she suffered Guillain
Barré Syndrome (“GBS”). (Petition at 1). On November 21, 2019, a decision was issued
awarding compensation to Petitioner based on the parties’ stipulation. (ECF No. 30).

      Petitioner has now filed a motion for attorney’s fees and costs, dated November
26, 2019, (ECF No. 34) requesting a total award of $10,091.99 (representing $8,407.60

1  Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am
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). 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, I agree that the identified material fits within this definition, I will redact such material from
public access.

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).
in fees and $1,684.39 in costs). In accordance with General Order #9 Petitioner filed a
signed statement indicating that she has not incurred out-of-pocket expenses. (ECF No.
35). Respondent reacted to the motion on December 10, 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 defers to the Court’s discretion to determine the amount to be awarded.
(ECF No. 36). By email correspondence on December 12, 2019, counsel for Petitioner
informed the staff attorney managing this case that Petitioner did not intend to file a reply.
See Informal Remark, December 12, 2019.

       I have reviewed the billing records submitted with Petitioner’s request. In my
experience, the request appears reasonable, and I find no cause to reduce the requested
hours or rates.

       The Vaccine Act permits an award of reasonable attorney’s fees and costs. §
15(e). Accordingly, I hereby GRANT Petitioner’s Motion for attorney’s fees and costs. I
award a total of $10,091.99 (representing $8,407.60 in attorney’s fees and $1,684.39 in
costs) as a lump sum in the form of a check jointly payable to Petitioner and Petitioner’s
counsel. 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. 3

IT IS SO ORDERED.

                                                      s/Brian H. Corcoran
                                                      Brian H. Corcoran
                                                      Chief Special Master




3 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties may expedite entry of judgment by filing a joint notice
renouncing their right to seek review.
                                                 2