Feedback

Agnew V Secretary Of Health And Human Services

    In the United States Court of Federal Claims
                                  OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
                                          No. 23-1818V


    ENOCH AGNEW,
                                                              Chief Special Master Corcoran
                         Petitioner,
    v.                                                        Filed: June 18, 2025


    SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND
    HUMAN SERVICES,

                        Respondent.


Jubaile Abila, Groth Law Firm, S.C., Brookfield, WI, for Petitioner.

Alexis B. Babcock, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

                      DECISION ON ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS 1

      On October 17, 2023, Enoch Agnew 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 alleged that he suffered from a shoulder injury related to vaccine
administration as a result of an influenza vaccination administered to him on October 22,
2020. Petition, ECF No. 1. On February 11, 2025, I issued a decision awarding
compensation to Petitioner based on Respondent’s proffer. ECF No. 29.



1
 Because this Decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action taken in this case, it must be made
publicly accessible and will be posted on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, and/or at
https://www.govinfo.gov/app/collection/uscourts/national/cofc, in accordance with the E-Government Act of
2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2018) (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
inf ormation, 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 f rom public access.
2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755. Hereinafter, for ease

of citation, all section ref erences to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. §
300aa (2018).
        Petitioner has now filed a motion for attorney’s fees and costs, requesting an award
of $25,230.47 (representing $24,538.80 in fees plus $691.67 in costs). Application for
Attorneys’ Fees and Costs (“Motion”) filed March 13, 2025, ECF No. 33. Furthermore,
Petitioner filed a signed statement representing that Petitioner incurred no personal out-
of-pocket expenses. ECF No. 33-1 at 21.

       Respondent reacted to the motion on March 28, 2025, indicating that he is satisfied
the statutory requirements for an award of attorneys’ fees and costs are met in this case
but deferring resolution of the amount to be awarded to my discretion. Motion at 2-4, ECF
No. 35. Petitioner filed no reply thereafter.

         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. Furthermore, Petitioner has provided supporting documentation for all
claimed costs. ECF No. 33-1 at 13-20. Respondent offered no specific objection to the
rates or amounts sought. I find the requested costs reasonable and hereby award them
in full.

       The Vaccine Act permits an award of reasonable attorney’s fees and costs for
successful claimants. Section 15(e). Accordingly, I hereby GRANT Petitioner’s Motion for
attorney’s fees and costs. Petitioner is awarded attorneys’ fees and costs in the total
amount of $25,230.47 (representing $24,538.80 in fees plus $691.67 in costs) to be
paid through an ACH deposit to Petitioner’s counsel’s IOLTA account for prompt
disbursement. In the absence of a timely-filed motion for review (see Appendix B to the
Rules of the Court), the Clerk of Court 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 f iling a joint notice
renouncing their right to seek review.
                                                  2