Heddens v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 15-734

Petitioner Amy N. Heddens filed a Vaccine Program petition on July 15, 2015 and moved on May 24, 2016 for interim attorneys’ fees and costs.
Her original attorney (Kelly Burdette) no longer represents her; a new firm (Conway, Homer & Chin‑Caplan) later appeared.
The Secretary opposed the interim-fees motion.
The Vaccine Program permits interim fee awards in appropriate cases, but special masters have discretion to deny them.
The special master evaluated Avera factors (protracted proceedings, costly experts, undue hardship) and found they did not warrant an interim award here.
The motion for interim attorneys’ fees and costs was denied without prejudice; petitioner may renew if the case becomes protracted or seek fees at case conclusion.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether an interim award of attorneys’ fees and costs is appropriate	Heddens sought interim fees because litigation had been ongoing and her original firm dissolved, creating financial/administrative need	Respondent opposed interim award; emphasized case is proceeding at a typical pace and no extraordinary costs (no expert retained)	Denied without prejudice: Avera factors not met (not protracted, no costly experts, law‑firm dissolution alone insufficient)

Avera v. Sec’y of Health & Hum. Servs., 515 F.3d 1343 (Fed. Cir. 2008) (permits interim fee awards and identifies factors for consideration)
Cloer v. Sec’y of Health & Hum. Servs., 675 F.3d 1358 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (discusses special‑master discretion in Vaccine Program rulings)
Rehn v. Sec’y of Health & Hum. Servs., 126 Fed. Cl. 86 (2016) (recognizes special masters’ discretion on interim fee awards)
Friedman v. Sec’y of Health & Hum. Servs., 94 Fed. Cl. 323 (2010) (upheld denial of interim attorneys’ fees as within special master’s discretion)