Quiero saber acerca de...

69682

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 8, 2021 / Notices
issued an Order Terminating Proceedings, in which the ALJ found that based on Respondents failure to comply with the Order for Prehearing Statements, Respondent has implicitly withdrawn her request for a hearing and ordered the proceedings terminated.
Id. at 4. The ALJ noted that Respondent had contacted the Office of Administrative Law Judges on September 20, 2019, and in response she had received: Specific instructions on where to call if she had questions, an additional copy of the Order for Prehearing Statements and an additional request for Respondent to provide a phone number where she could be reached for the conference, which she never provided. Id. at 2. On October 2, 2019, Respondent sent multiple emails to the Tribunal offering an explanation and requesting that the proceedings be reopened. ALJX 1317. However, on October 2, 2019, the ALJ issued an Order Denying Respondents Request to Reopen These Proceedings, in which the ALJ found that Respondent had not demonstrated sufficient good cause to reopen the matter. RFAAX F, at 4. I have reviewed and agree with the procedural rulings of the ALJ.
On March 30, 2020, the Government forwarded its RFAA, along with the evidentiary record for this matter, to my office. Having considered the record in its entirety, I find that the record established, by substantial evidence, that Respondent committed acts that render her continued registration inconsistent with the public interest.
Accordingly, I conclude that the appropriate sanction is to revoke Respondents DEA registration and to deny any pending applications for renewal or new registration in Louisiana. I make the following findings of fact.
I. Findings of Fact
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1

A. Respondents DEA Registration Respondent is registered with the DEA as a practitioner authorized to handle controlled substances in schedules IIV under DEA registration number BM7946835 at 4336 North Blvd., Suite 101, Baton Rouge, LA
70806. RFAAX G1. Respondent filed a renewal of her DEA registration on or about December 5, 2019. RFAAX G, at 1.1
1 It appears from Agency records that Respondents registration is in retired status, although it is unclear exactly what precipitated that status. Regardless, the fact that a registration has expired during the pendency of an OSC does not impact my jurisdiction or prerogative under the Controlled Substances Act hereinafter, CSA to adjudicate the OSC to finality. Jeffrey D. Olsen, M.D., 84 FR 68474 2019. Adjudicating this matter
VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:53 Dec 07, 2021

Jkt 256001

B. Governments Case The Governments RFAA includes 18
attached exhibits consisting of copies of hearing procedural documents and orders, a declaration from a DEA
Diversion Investigator hereinafter, DI, a copy of Respondents DEA certificate of registration, various documents pertaining to the status of Respondents Louisiana CDS license, and various prescription records from Respondent.
See RFAAX AG11.
In a Declaration dated February 27, 2020, a DI assigned to the New Orleans Field Division described the service of the OSC on Respondent as well as the investigation activities involved in the current matter, including the collection of the Governments exhibits. RFAAX G, at 14.
On November 3, 2016, the Louisiana Board of Pharmacy hereinafter, the Board provided Respondent with a Termination Notice, notifying her that her CDS license had been terminated because she had failed to renew her license within 30 days after its expiration on September 1, 2016.
RFAAX G3. Respondents CDS license remained in an expired status until it was renewed, effective January 17, 2017.
RFAAX G2 Expiration Summary Memo from the Louisiana Board of Pharmacy, dated June 27, 2019.2
Nonetheless, from September 1, 2016, to January 17, 2017, Respondent issued approximately 1,850 prescriptions for controlled substances in the State of Louisiana. RFAAX G6 and G9.
On November 3, 2017, the Board provided Respondent with a second Termination Notice, notifying her that her CDS license had been terminated, because she had failed to renew her license within 30 days after its expiration on September 1, 2017.
RFAAX G4. Respondents CDS
licensed remained in an expired status until it was renewed, effective June 13, 2018. RFAAX G2. Nonetheless, from to finality will create an official record the Agency can use in any future interactions with Respondent.
As additionally noted in Olsen, a final adjudication is a public record of the Agencys expectations for current and prospective members of that community, and adjudications inform stakeholders, such as legislators and the public, about the Agencys work and allow them to provide feedback to the Agency, thereby helping shape how the Agency carries out its responsibilities under the CSA. Id. Adjudicating this matter to finality will create a public record to educate current and prospective registrants about the Agencys expectations regarding the responsibilities of registrants under the CSA and allow stakeholders to provide feedback regarding the Agencys enforcement priorities and practices.
2 According to the Expiration Summary Memo, the Board was only able to verify periods of expiration after 2007 because prior to 2007, the CDS
program was overseen by another agency. Id.

PO 00000

Frm 00072

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

September 1, 2017, to June 13, 2018, Respondent issued approximately 1,730
prescriptions for controlled substances in the State of Louisiana. RFAAX G7
and G10.
On November 6, 2018, the Board provided Respondent with a third Termination Notice, notifying her that her CDS license had been terminated because she had failed to renew her license within 30 days after its expiration on September 1, 2018.
RFAAX G5. Respondents CDS
licensed remained in an expired status until it was renewed, effective February 15, 2019. RFAAX G2. Nonetheless, from September 1, 2018, to February 15, 2019, Respondent issued approximately 400 prescriptions for controlled substances in the State of Louisiana.
RFAAX G8 and G11.
II. Discussion A. Governments Position In its RFAA, the Government sought to revoke Respondents DEA registration and to deny any pending applications for renewal or modification of Respondents DEA registration because Respondent had committed acts which render her continued registration inconsistent with the public interest, in violation of 21 U.S.C. 824a and 823f. RFAA, at 1. Specifically, the Government argued that Respondent had repeatedly violated state and federal law by issuing thousands of prescriptions for controlled substances while she lacked the authority to do so due to the expiration of her Louisiana CDS license. Id. at 711. The Government concluded its RFAA by requesting that Respondents DEA
registration be revoked and that any pending applications for modification or renewal of Respondents DEA
registration be denied. Id. at 11.
B. Respondents Position The only statements from Respondent regarding the allegations appear in the initial letter that Respondent submitted in response to the OSC, which offers some explanation as to her misconduct, but offers no supporting evidence or ability for me to assess the credibility of her unsworn statements. See RFAAX B.
In her letter, Respondent stated that, as to the first period when she was issuing prescriptions while her license was expired, she was under a lot of stress due to an ongoing divorce and from working two jobs. Id. Respondent stated that she did not know that her license was expired, and that when she was notified in early 2017 that the license had expired, she immediately got it renewed. Id. As to the second period
E:FRFM08DEN1.SGM

08DEN1