William G. Hamilton, Jr., M.D.; Revocation of Registration, 39129-39130 [E6-10781]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 132 / Tuesday, July 11, 2006 / Notices
materially retarded, by reason of
imports from China and Korea of
diamond sawblades and parts thereof,
provided for in subheading 8202.39.00
of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of
the United States, that have been found
by the Department of Commerce
(Commerce) to be sold in the United
States at less than fair value
(LTFV).2 thnsp;3
Background
The Commission instituted these
investigations effective May 3, 2005,
following receipt of a petition filed with
the Commission and Commerce by the
Diamond Sawblade Manufacturers’
Coalition (‘‘DSMC’’) and its individual
members: Blackhawk Diamond, Inc.,
Fullerton, CA; 4 Diamond B, Inc., Santa
Fe Springs, CA; Diamond Products,
Elyria, OH; Dixie Diamond, Lilburn, GA;
Hoffman Diamond, Punxsutawney, PA;
Hyde Manufacturing, Southbridge, MA;
Sanders Saws, Honey Brook, PA; Terra
Diamond, Salt Lake City, UT; and
Western Saw, Inc., Oxnard, CA. The
final phase of the investigations was
scheduled by the Commission following
notification of a preliminary
determination by Commerce that
imports of diamond sawblades and parts
thereof from China and Korea were
being sold at LTFV within the meaning
of section 733(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C.
1673b(b)). Notice of the scheduling of
the final phase of the Commission’s
investigation and of a public hearing to
be held in connection therewith was
given by posting copies of the notice in
the Office of the Secretary, U.S.
International Trade Commission,
Washington, DC, and by publishing the
notice in the Federal Register of January
20, 2006 (71 FR 3324). The hearing was
held in Washington, DC, on May 16,
2006, and all persons who requested the
opportunity were permitted to appear in
person or by counsel.
The Commission transmitted its
determination in these investigations to
the Secretary of Commerce on July 5,
2006. The views of the Commission are
contained in USITC Publication 3862
(July 2006), entitled Diamond Products
and Parts Thereof from China and
Korea: Investigation Nos. 731–TA–1092
and 1093 (Final).
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
By order of the Commission.
2 Vice Chairman Shara L. Aranoff and
Commissioner Jennifer A. Hillman dissenting.
3 When packaged together as a set for retail sale
with an item that is separately classified under
headings 8202 to 8205 of the HTS, diamond
sawblades or parts thereof may be imported under
HTS heading 8206.
4 Blackhawk Diamond ceased operations in
January 2006.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:49 Jul 10, 2006
Jkt 208001
Issued: July 5, 2006.
Marilyn R. Abbott,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. E6–10839 Filed 7–10–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Drug Enforcement Administration
William G. Hamilton, Jr., M.D.;
Revocation of Registration
Procedural History
On July 23, 2004, the Deputy
Assistant Administrator, Office of
Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement
Administration (DEA), issued an Order
to Show Cause to William G. Hamilton,
M.D. (Respondent), which proposed to
revoke his DEA Certificate of
Registration AH8873588, as a
practitioner, see 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3), and
to deny any pending applications for
renewal or modification. See 21 U.S.C.
823(f). As grounds for the proceeding,
the Show Cause Order alleged that on
March 3, 2004, the Medical Board of
California had suspended Respondent’s
state medical license and that
Respondent was without state
authorization to handle controlled
substances in that state. The Show
Cause Order notified Dr. Hamilton that
should no request for a hearing be filed
within 30 days, his hearing right would
be deemed waived.
On July 28, 2004, the Show Cause
Order was sent by certified mail to
Respondent at his home address in San
Diego, California. However, the letter
went unclaimed. On November 23,
2004, the Show Cause Order was sent
via regular mail to Respondent at the
same address, and on December 13,
2004, a DEA Diversion Investigator
personally served him with the Order.
At the time of personal service,
Respondent acknowledged that he had
received the Show Cause Order that was
mailed to him on November 23, 2004.
Subsequently, DEA has not received a
request for a hearing or any other reply
from Respondent or anyone purporting
to represent him in this matter.
Therefore, finding that: (1) Thirty
days have passed since the delivery of
the Order To Show Cause to
Respondent; and that (2) no request for
a hearing has been received, I conclude
that Respondent has waived his hearing
right. See James E. Thomas, M.D., 70 FR
3,564 (2005); Steven A. Barnes, M.D., 69
FR 51,474 (2004); David W. Linder, 67
FR 12,579 (2002). After considering
material from the investigative file in
this matter, this final order is entered
PO 00000
Frm 00081
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
39129
without a hearing pursuant to 21 CFR
1301.43(d) & (e), and § 1301.46.
Discussion
I find that Respondent is currently
registered with DEA as a practitioner
authorized to handle controlled
substances in Schedules III through V
under Certificate of Registration
AH8873588, with an expiration date of
October 31, 2005. Respondent’s
registration, however, has remained in
effect during these proceedings.
According to information in the
investigative file, on March 3, 2004, a
California State Administrative Law
Judge (ALJ) issued an Order, which
immediately suspended Respondent’s
Physician and Surgeon’s Certificate. The
suspension was based, in part, on the
ALJ’s finding that Respondent was
unable to safely practice medicine due
to a mental or physical condition. Since
then, I have become aware of further
proceedings involving Respondent’s
state medical license.
It has long been recognized that
‘‘[a]gencies may take official notice of
facts at any stage in a proceeding—even
in the final decision.’’ U.S. Dept. of
Justice, Attorney General’s Manual on
the Administrative Procedure Act 80
(1947) (Wm. W. Gaunt & Sons, Inc.,
Reprint 1979). Therefore, pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 556(e) and 21 CFR 1316.59(e), I
hereby take official notice of the fact
that on May 12, 2005, the State of
California revoked Respondent’s
medical license.1
Respondent has submitted no
evidence showing that the State’s
revocation order has been stayed or
vacated. Therefore, I find that
Respondent is currently not authorized
to practice medicine in the State of
California, and that he is also without
authorization to handle controlled
substances in that state.
DEA does not have statutory authority
under the Controlled Substances Act to
issue or maintain a registration if the
applicant or registrant is without state
authority to handle controlled
substances in the State in which he
practices medicine. See 21 U.S.C.
802(21), 823(f), & 824(a)(3). This
prerequisite has been consistently
1 In accordance with the Administrative
Procedure Act and DEA’s regulations, Respondent
is ‘‘entitled on timely request, to an opportunity to
show to the contrary.’’ 5 U.S.C. 556(e). See also 21
CFR 1316.59(e). DEA’s regulations contain no
provision for requesting reconsideration of a final
order. See Robert A. Leslie, M.D., 60 FR 14004,
14005 (1995). To allow Respondent the opportunity
to refute the facts of which I am taking official
notice, publication of this final order shall be
withheld for a fifteen-day period, which shall begin
on the date of service by placing this order in the
mail.
E:\FR\FM\11JYN1.SGM
11JYN1
39130
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 132 / Tuesday, July 11, 2006 / Notices
applied. See Richard J. Clement, M.D.,
68 FR 12,103 (2003); Dominick A. Ricci,
M.D., 58 FR 51,104 (1993); Bobby Watts,
M.D., 53 FR 11,919 (1988). Therefore,
Respondent is not entitled to maintain
his DEA registration.
Order
Accordingly, pursuant to the
authority vested in me by 21 U.S.C. 823
and 824 and 28 CFR 0.100(b) and 0.104,
I hereby order that DEA Certificate of
Registration, AH8873588, issued to
William G. Hamilton, Jr., M.D., be, and
it hereby is, revoked. I further order that
any pending applications for renewal or
modification of the aforementioned
registration be, and they hereby are,
denied. This order is effective
August 10, 2006.
Dated: June 12, 2006.
Michele M. Leonhart,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. E6–10781 Filed 7–10–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–09–P
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Drug Enforcement Administration
[Docket No. 05–7]
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Sheran Arden Yeates, M.D.;
Revocation of Registration
Introduction and Procedural History
On October 12, 2004, the Deputy
Assistant Administrator, Office of
Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement
Administration, issued an Order to
Show Cause to Respondent Sheran
Arden Yeates, M.D. The Show Cause
Order proposed to revoke Respondent’s
DEA Certificate of Registration,
BY5532076, as a practitioner, see 21
U.S.C. 824(a)(3), and to deny any
pending applications for renewal or
modification. See id. § 823(f). As
grounds for the proceeding, the Show
Cause Order alleged that on May 21,
2004, the Tennessee Board of Medical
Examiners had indefinitely suspended
Respondent’s state medical license.
Respondent requested a hearing; the
matter was assigned to Administrative
Law Judge Gail Randall. Shortly after
the ALJ ordered the parties to file
prehearing statements, the Government
moved for summary disposition and
sought to stay the proceedings while the
ALJ considered its motion. As grounds
for its motion, the Government asserted
that Respondent’s state license had been
indefinitely suspended and that
summary disposition was warranted
because no material fact was in dispute.
In support of the motion, the
Government attached the State Board’s
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:49 Jul 10, 2006
Jkt 208001
order, which summarily suspended
Respondent’s medical license. The ALJ
granted the stay and issued an order,
which offered Respondent an
opportunity to respond.
Thereafter, Respondent filed a
response. Respondent asserted that the
state had lifted the suspension and
reinstated his medical license. In
support, Respondent attached an order
from the state board proceeding. The
order noted that the state had
voluntarily dismissed the proceeding
and lifted the summary suspension of
Respondent’s state license.
Because Respondent’s lack of state
authority was the sole basis for this
proceeding, the ALJ denied the
Government’s motion for summary
disposition. The ALJ, however,
continued the stay and instructed the
Government to reply.
The Government then moved for
reconsideration based upon newly
discovered evidence. In the motion, the
Government asserted that Respondent’s
state license had expired on July 31,
2004, and had not been renewed. As
support, the Government attached a
printout of a Tennessee Department of
Health ‘‘Licensure Verification’’ Web
page, which indicated that Respondent’s
license status was ‘‘inactive.’’ ALJ at 3.
The attachment, however, contained
no explanation as to the meaning of the
term ‘‘inactive.’’ Accordingly, the ALJ
ordered the parties to provide additional
documentation clarifying Respondent’s
status. Neither party complied with the
ALJ’s order.
The Government sought an extension
of time and filed a new motion for
reconsideration. In its motion, the
Government asserted that it had
confirmed that Respondent did not
possess a valid state license and that the
state authorities had agreed to provide
written documentation of this, but had
yet to do so. Because the Respondent
had also failed to comply with her
order, the ALJ concluded that granting
an extension would cause no prejudice.
The ALJ thus granted the extension and
again ordered both parties to submit
documentation regarding Respondent’s
status.
Shortly thereafter, the Government
renewed its motion for summary
disposition and submitted new evidence
in the form of a notarized letter from the
Tennessee Department of Health. The
letter, which is undated, stated that on
May 21, 2004, Respondent’s medical
license had been summarily suspended,
that Respondent had failed to renew his
medical license before July 31, 2004
(which apparently was its expiration
date), that Respondent’s license was
inactive, and most significantly that
PO 00000
Frm 00082
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Respondent ‘‘is not currently authorized
to practice medicine in the state of
Tennessee.’’ ALJ at 4 (quoting letter of
Rosemarie A. Otto, Executive Director,
Tennessee Bd. of Med. Examiners, to
James Hambuechen, Office of Chief
Counsel, DEA) (emphasis in original).
The ALJ waited more than six weeks
for Respondent to reply. See ALJ at 4.
When no reply was forthcoming, the
ALJ granted the Government’s motion
for summary disposition. In so ruling,
the ALJ noted the unchallenged
evidence that Respondent’s state
medical license had expired on July 31,
2004, and had not been renewed. See id.
at 5. Because Respondent lacked
authority to handle controlled
substances in Tennessee, the ALJ
concluded that ‘‘DEA does not have
authority to maintain the Respondent’s
DEA Certification of Registration.’’ Id.
The ALJ thus granted the
Government’s motion. The ALJ further
recommended that I revoke
Respondent’s DEA Certificate of
Registration, and deny any pending
applications for renewal or modification
of the same. The ALJ then transmitted
the record to me for final action.
Discussion
I adopt the ALJ’s findings that as of
the date of her recommended decision,
Respondent was ‘‘not currently licensed
to practice medicine in the state of
Tennessee,’’ and that ‘‘Respondent [was]
not currently authorized to handle
controlled substances in Tennessee.’’
ALJ at 5. The letter supporting these
findings was undated. I acknowledge
that the letter states that Respondent’s
license had been summarily suspended,
that Respondent had failed to renew his
license, and that Respondent ‘‘is not
currently authorized to practice
medicine’’ in Tennessee. The letter does
not, however, establish that
Respondent’s licensure status remains
unchanged as of the date of this final
order.
Therefore, I have decided to take
official notice of subsequent state
proceedings involving Respondent. See
5 U.S.C. 556(e); 21 CFR 1316.59(e). It
has long been recognized that
‘‘[a]gencies may take official notice of
facts at any stage in a proceeding—even
in the final decision.’’ U.S. Dept. of
Justice, Attorney General’s Manual on
the Administrative Procedure Act 80
(1947) (Wm. W. Gaunt & Sons, Inc.,
Reprint 1979).1
1 In accordance with the Administrative
Procedure Act and DEA’s regulations, Respondent
is ‘‘entitled on timely request, to an opportunity to
show to the contrary.’’ 5 U.S.C. 556(e). See also 21
CFR 1316.59(e). I acknowledge that DEA’s
regulations contain no provision for requesting
E:\FR\FM\11JYN1.SGM
11JYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 132 (Tuesday, July 11, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39129-39130]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-10781]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Drug Enforcement Administration
William G. Hamilton, Jr., M.D.; Revocation of Registration
Procedural History
On July 23, 2004, the Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of
Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), issued an
Order to Show Cause to William G. Hamilton, M.D. (Respondent), which
proposed to revoke his DEA Certificate of Registration AH8873588, as a
practitioner, see 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3), and to deny any pending
applications for renewal or modification. See 21 U.S.C. 823(f). As
grounds for the proceeding, the Show Cause Order alleged that on March
3, 2004, the Medical Board of California had suspended Respondent's
state medical license and that Respondent was without state
authorization to handle controlled substances in that state. The Show
Cause Order notified Dr. Hamilton that should no request for a hearing
be filed within 30 days, his hearing right would be deemed waived.
On July 28, 2004, the Show Cause Order was sent by certified mail
to Respondent at his home address in San Diego, California. However,
the letter went unclaimed. On November 23, 2004, the Show Cause Order
was sent via regular mail to Respondent at the same address, and on
December 13, 2004, a DEA Diversion Investigator personally served him
with the Order. At the time of personal service, Respondent
acknowledged that he had received the Show Cause Order that was mailed
to him on November 23, 2004. Subsequently, DEA has not received a
request for a hearing or any other reply from Respondent or anyone
purporting to represent him in this matter.
Therefore, finding that: (1) Thirty days have passed since the
delivery of the Order To Show Cause to Respondent; and that (2) no
request for a hearing has been received, I conclude that Respondent has
waived his hearing right. See James E. Thomas, M.D., 70 FR 3,564
(2005); Steven A. Barnes, M.D., 69 FR 51,474 (2004); David W. Linder,
67 FR 12,579 (2002). After considering material from the investigative
file in this matter, this final order is entered without a hearing
pursuant to 21 CFR 1301.43(d) & (e), and Sec. 1301.46.
Discussion
I find that Respondent is currently registered with DEA as a
practitioner authorized to handle controlled substances in Schedules
III through V under Certificate of Registration AH8873588, with an
expiration date of October 31, 2005. Respondent's registration,
however, has remained in effect during these proceedings.
According to information in the investigative file, on March 3,
2004, a California State Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) issued an
Order, which immediately suspended Respondent's Physician and Surgeon's
Certificate. The suspension was based, in part, on the ALJ's finding
that Respondent was unable to safely practice medicine due to a mental
or physical condition. Since then, I have become aware of further
proceedings involving Respondent's state medical license.
It has long been recognized that ``[a]gencies may take official
notice of facts at any stage in a proceeding--even in the final
decision.'' U.S. Dept. of Justice, Attorney General's Manual on the
Administrative Procedure Act 80 (1947) (Wm. W. Gaunt & Sons, Inc.,
Reprint 1979). Therefore, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 556(e) and 21 CFR
1316.59(e), I hereby take official notice of the fact that on May 12,
2005, the State of California revoked Respondent's medical license.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act and
DEA's regulations, Respondent is ``entitled on timely request, to an
opportunity to show to the contrary.'' 5 U.S.C. 556(e). See also 21
CFR 1316.59(e). DEA's regulations contain no provision for
requesting reconsideration of a final order. See Robert A. Leslie,
M.D., 60 FR 14004, 14005 (1995). To allow Respondent the opportunity
to refute the facts of which I am taking official notice,
publication of this final order shall be withheld for a fifteen-day
period, which shall begin on the date of service by placing this
order in the mail.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Respondent has submitted no evidence showing that the State's
revocation order has been stayed or vacated. Therefore, I find that
Respondent is currently not authorized to practice medicine in the
State of California, and that he is also without authorization to
handle controlled substances in that state.
DEA does not have statutory authority under the Controlled
Substances Act to issue or maintain a registration if the applicant or
registrant is without state authority to handle controlled substances
in the State in which he practices medicine. See 21 U.S.C. 802(21),
823(f), & 824(a)(3). This prerequisite has been consistently
[[Page 39130]]
applied. See Richard J. Clement, M.D., 68 FR 12,103 (2003); Dominick A.
Ricci, M.D., 58 FR 51,104 (1993); Bobby Watts, M.D., 53 FR 11,919
(1988). Therefore, Respondent is not entitled to maintain his DEA
registration.
Order
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority vested in me by 21 U.S.C.
823 and 824 and 28 CFR 0.100(b) and 0.104, I hereby order that DEA
Certificate of Registration, AH8873588, issued to William G. Hamilton,
Jr., M.D., be, and it hereby is, revoked. I further order that any
pending applications for renewal or modification of the aforementioned
registration be, and they hereby are, denied. This order is effective
August 10, 2006.
Dated: June 12, 2006.
Michele M. Leonhart,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. E6-10781 Filed 7-10-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
