VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_23-vv-00732
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_23-vv-00732
Petitioner: Rose Panzarella
Filed: 2023-05-17
Decided: 2025-07-08
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 2021-10-18
Condition: immune thrombocytopenic purpura
Outcome: dismissed
Award amount USD: 

AI-assisted case summary:
Rose Panzarella filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program on May 17, 2023. She alleged that an influenza vaccine administered on October 18, 2021, caused her to develop immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP). The Special Master reviewed the record and determined that Ms. Panzarella had not demonstrated entitlement to an award. To qualify for compensation, a petitioner must prove either that the injury is listed on the Vaccine Injury Table or that the vaccine actually caused the injury. The record did not contain evidence of a "Table Injury." Furthermore, the record lacked persuasive evidence that the alleged ITP was vaccine-caused or vaccine-related. The program requires that a petition be supported by medical records or the opinion of a competent physician. The public decision states that the record did not contain sufficient medical records to support the claim, and Ms. Panzarella did not offer a supporting medical opinion. Consequently, the Special Master concluded that Ms. Panzarella failed to demonstrate entitlement and dismissed the case for insufficient proof. Judgment was entered accordingly. The decision was issued by Special Master Mindy Michaels Roth on July 8, 2025. Paul R. Brazil, Esq., represented the petitioner, and Mary Holmes, Esq., represented the respondent.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioner Rose Panzarella alleged that an influenza vaccine received on October 18, 2021, caused immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP). The Special Master found that the record did not contain evidence of a "Table Injury" or persuasive evidence that the vaccine actually caused the ITP. The petition was not supported by sufficient medical records or a competent physician's opinion. The case was dismissed for insufficient proof by Special Master Mindy Michaels Roth on July 8, 2025. Petitioner was represented by Paul R. Brazil, Esq., and respondent by Mary Holmes, Esq.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_23-vv-00732-0
Date issued/filed: 2025-08-04
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 7/8/2025) regarding 38 DECISION of Special Master. Signed by Special Master Mindy Michaels Roth. (msg) Service on parties made.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:23-vv-00732-UNJ Document 42 Filed 08/04/25 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 23-732V
Filed: July 8, 2025
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
ROSE PANZARELLA, *
*
Petitioner, *
*
v. *
*
SECRETARY OF HEALTH *
AND HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
Respondent. *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Paul R. Brazil, Esq., Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA for petitioner.
Mary Holmes, Esq., U.S. Dept. of Justice, Washington, DC for respondent.
DECISION1
Roth, Special Master:
On May 17, 2023, Rose Panzarella (“petitioner”) filed a petition for Vaccine Compensation
in the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (“the Program”),2 alleging that the
influenza (“flu”) vaccine she received on October 18, 2021 caused her to develop immune
thrombocytopenic purpura (“ITP”). Petition, ECF No. 1. The information in the record, however,
does not show entitlement to an award under the Program. On July 8, 2025, petitioner filed a
Motion for Dismissal Decision requesting that her case be dismissed. ECF No. 36.
To receive compensation under the Program, petitioner must prove either 1) that she
suffered a “Table Injury” – i.e., an injury falling within the Vaccine Injury Table – corresponding
to her vaccination, or 2) that she suffered an injury that was actually caused by a vaccine. See §§
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 information, the disclosure of which would
constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, the undersigned finds that the identified material fits
within this definition, such material will be redacted 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).

Case 1:23-vv-00732-UNJ Document 42 Filed 08/04/25 Page 2 of 2
13(a)(1)(A) and 11(c)(1). An examination of the record did not uncover any evidence that
petitioner suffered a “Table Injury.” Further, the record does not contain persuasive evidence
indicating that petitioner’s alleged injury was vaccine-caused or in any way vaccine-related.
Under the Act, a petitioner may not be given a Program award based solely on the
petitioner’s claims alone. Rather, the petition must be supported by either medical records or by
the opinion of a competent physician. § 13(a)(1). In this case, because there are insufficient medical
records supporting petitioner’s claim, a medical opinion must be offered in support. Petitioner,
however, has offered no such opinion that supports a finding of entitlement.
Accordingly, it is clear from the record in this case that petitioner has failed to demonstrate
either that she suffered a “Table Injury” or that her injuries were “actually caused” by a
vaccination. Thus, this case is dismissed for insufficient proof. The Clerk shall enter judgment
accordingly.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/ Mindy Michaels Roth
Mindy Michaels Roth
Special Master
2