RIZZO v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 24-1482V
CHARISSE RIZZO,
Petitioner,
v.
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES,
Respondent.
Chief Special Master Corcoran
Filed: December 11, 2025
Jessica E. Choper, Britcher Leone & Sergio, L.L.C., Glen Rock, NJ, for Petitioner.
Sara DeStefano, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
DECISION ON ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS1
On September 23, 2024, Charisse Rizzo 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 she suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine
administration following an influenza vaccine she received on October 17, 2022. Petition,
ECF No. 1. On June 3, 2025, I issued a ruling on entitlement finding Petitioner entitled to
compensation. ECF No. 24. On June 4, 2025, I issued a decision awarding compensation
to Petitioner, based on the Respondent’s proffer. ECF No. 28.
1Because 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
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 section references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. §
300aa (2018).
Case 1:24-vv-01482-UNJ Document 37 Filed 01/13/26 Page 1 of 2

2
Petitioner has now filed a motion for attorney’s fees and costs, requesting an award
of $38,378.17 (representing $37,615.00 in fees plus $763.17 in costs). Application for
Attorneys’ 	Fees 	and 	Costs 	(“Motion”) 	filed 	September 	29, 	2025, 	ECF 	No. 	34.
Furthermore, Petitioner filed a signed statement representing that no personal out-of-
pocket expenses were incurred. ECF No. 34 at 31-32.
Respondent reacted to the motion on October 10, 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. Response
at 2, 4. ECF No. 35. Petitioner filed no reply thereafter.
I have reviewed the billing records submitted with Petitioner’s request. The rates
requested for work performed through 2025 are reasonable and consistent with our prior
determinations and will therefore be awarded herein. And all time billed to the matter was
reasonably incurred.
Furthermore, Petitioner has provided supporting documentation for all claimed
costs. ECF No. 34 at 4-21. 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 $38,378.17 (representing $37,615.00 in fees plus $763.17 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 filing a joint notice
renouncing their right to seek review.
Case 1:24-vv-01482-UNJ Document 37 Filed 01/13/26 Page 2 of 2