Patrick K. Riggs, M.D.; Denial of Application, 71959-71960 [E7-24608]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 19, 2007 / Notices methamphetamine traffickers,’’ and which has ‘‘been disproportionately represented in clandestine lab seizures around the United States.’’ T. Young Associates, Inc., 71 FR 60567, 60568 (2006) (int. quotations and citation omitted). See also H & R Corp., 71 FR 30168, 30169 (2006); Joy’s Ideas, 70 FR at 33197. Moreover, a substantial number of the invoices suggest that Respondent’s customers purchased quantities of these products that far exceeded legitimate demand. This factor thus further supports the conclusion that Respondent’s registration would be ‘‘inconsistent with the public interest.’’ 21 U.S.C. 823(h). Order Accordingly, pursuant to the authority vested in me by 21 U.S.C. 823(h), as well as 28 CFR 0.100(b) and 0.104, I order that the application of MB Wholesale, Inc., for a DEA Certificate of Registration to distribute list I chemicals, be, and it hereby is, denied. This order is effective January 18, 2008. Dated: December 7, 2007. Michele M. Leonhart, Deputy Administrator. [FR Doc. E7–24610 Filed 12–18–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410–09–P DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES Patrick K. Riggs, M.D.; Denial of Application On June 19, 2007, the Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration, issued an Order to Show Cause to Patrick K. Riggs (Respondent), of Fort Worth, Texas. The Show Cause Order proposed the denial of Respondent’s pending application for a DEA Certificate of Registration as a practitioner, on the ground that his registration would be ‘‘inconsistent with the public interest.’’ Show Cause Order at 1 (citing 21 U.S.C. 823(f) & 824(a)(4)). The Show Cause Order specifically alleged that ‘‘from May 2005 through August 2006 [Respondent], ordered 22,500 dosage units of hydrocodone from Henry Schein, Inc.,’’ and that notwithstanding his ‘‘assertions to Henry Schein, Inc., that [he was] practicing medicine during that period [Respondent], subsequently admitted to DEA Diversion Investigators that [he] had not practiced medicine since 1997 and had no current patients.’’ Id. The Show Cause Order alleged that on August 31, 2006, Respondent had met with DEA Diversion Investigators at his VerDate Aug<31>2005 21:40 Dec 18, 2007 Jkt 214001 home and admitted to them that he had consumed all of the hydrocodone drugs that he had obtained from Henry Schein, Inc. Id. The Show Cause Order further alleged that Respondent did not maintain the purchasing and dispensing records required under federal law for the controlled substances he had obtained from Henry Schein, Inc. Id. Finally, the Show Cause Order alleged that during the aforementioned meeting with DEA investigators, Respondent had upon the advice of counsel, voluntarily surrendered his DEA Registration and agreed not to apply for a new registration for a two-year period. Id. at 2. On June 25, 2007, the Show Cause Order, which also notified Respondent of his right to request a hearing on the allegations, was served on him by a Federal Express delivery to his residence, which is also the address of his proposed registered location. Because: (1) More than thirty days have passed since service of the Show Cause Order, and (2) neither Respondent, nor anyone purporting to represent him, has requested a hearing, I conclude that Respondent has waived his right to a hearing. See 21 CFR 1301.43(d). I therefore enter this Final Order without a hearing based on relevant material contained in the investigative file, see id. 1301.43(e), and make the following findings. Findings Respondent previously held a DEA Registration as a practitioner, which authorized him to dispense controlled substances in schedules II through V. On various dates between May 2005 and August 2006, DEA received several reports from Henry Schein, Inc., regarding Respondent’s excessive purchases of controlled substances. These reports showed that during the above period, Respondent purchased 22,500 dosage units of combination hydrocodone/acetaminophen (all in 10/ 325 mg. strength), 1400 dosage units of clonazepam (in both 1 mg. and 2 mg. strength), 1200 dosage units of aspirin with codeine (60 mg.), 500 dosage units of acetaminophen with codeine (60 mg.), and hydrocodone with ibuprofen (7.5/200 mg.).1 Sometime around September 2005, a Schein employee apparently questioned Respondent regarding his purchases. Accordingly, on September 24, 2005, Respondent faxed a letter which stated that he had served as ‘‘a consultant to 1 The reports also showed that Respondent had purchased two anabolic steroids, nandrolone and testosterone cypionate. PO 00000 Frm 00089 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 71959 the TXSBME’’ 2 from 1995 through 1998 ‘‘in the area of disciplinary action,’’ and had ‘‘earned * * * a great many enemies (because of my testimony in med[ical] malpractice cases for the state.’’ Respondent further wrote that he was engaged in the practice of ‘‘general medicine,’’ and that his ‘‘patient base is select. The concentration is chronic pain secondary to terminal illness[,] i.e., cancer.’’ On August 31, 2006, DEA investigators went to Respondent’s residence (and registered location) and met with Respondent and his attorney regarding his excessive purchases. During the interview, Respondent was asked what medications he took. Respondent went to another room and retrieved approximately twenty-five containers of non-controlled prescription drugs. Upon further questioning, Respondent admitted that he had been on methadone and pulled an empty container of methadone from his pocket. During the interview, Respondent also admitted that he had not practiced medicine since 1997 and did not have any patients. One of the investigators then presented to Respondent’s attorney a spreadsheet listing his controlled substance purchases from Schein. After Respondent and his lawyer were allowed to privately discuss the matter, Respondent admitted that he had used all of the controlled substances which he had purchased from Schein. Respondent also stated that to prevent damaging his liver, he had ground up the hydrocodone tablets to separate out the acetaminophen. Respondent also admitted that he had failed to maintain purchasing and dispensing records as required by Federal law. Based on this information, the investigators advised Respondent’s counsel that they would seek an Order to Show Cause to revoke his registration unless he voluntarily surrendered it. After consulting with his attorney, Respondent voluntarily surrendered his registration and signed the applicable form.3 Two months later, on October 30, 2006, Respondent submitted an application for a new registration. On the form, Respondent acknowledged that he had surrendered his registration and explained that ‘‘[t]he surrender[] could be classified as a misunderstanding secondary to misinformation. I view it[] as an unusual set of unnecessary and 2 Presumably, the Texas State Board of Medical Examiners. 3 On the form, Respondent also ‘‘agree[d] not to re apply for a period of two years.’’ E:\FR\FM\19DEN1.SGM 19DEN1 71960 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 19, 2007 / Notices humiliating circumstances brought together by a malicious third party.’’ Discussion Section 303(f) of the Controlled Substances Act provides that ‘‘[t]he Attorney General shall register practitioners * * * to dispense * * * controlled substances in schedule II, III, IV, or V, if the applicant is authorized to dispense * * * controlled substances under the laws of the State in which he practices.’’ 21 U.S.C. 823(f). Section 303(f) further provides that ‘‘[t]he Attorney General may deny an application for such registration if he determines that the issuance of such registration would be inconsistent with the public interest.’’ Id. In making the public interest determination, the Act requires the consideration of the following factors: mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES (1) The recommendation of the appropriate State licensing board or professional disciplinary authority. (2) The applicant’s experience in dispensing * * * controlled substances. (3) The applicant’s conviction record under Federal or State laws relating to the manufacture, distribution, or dispensing of controlled substances. (4) Compliance with applicable State, Federal, or local laws relating to controlled substances. (5) Such other conduct which may threaten the public health and safety. Id. [T]hese factors are * * * considered in the disjunctive.’’ Robert A. Leslie, M.D., 68 FR 15227, 15230 (2003). I ‘‘may rely on any one or a combination of factors, and may give each factor the weight [I] deem[] appropriate in determining whether a registration should be revoked.’’ Id. Moreover, I am ‘‘not required to make findings as to all of the factors.’’ Hoxie v. DEA, 419 F.3d 477, 482 (6th Cir. 2005); see also Morall v. DEA, 412 F.3d 165, 173–74 (D.C. Cir. 2005). In this case, I conclude that factors two and four are dispositive.4 As the record demonstrates, Respondent acquired large quantities of controlled substances including 22,500 tablets of combination hydrocodone/ acetaminophen (a schedule III controlled substance, 21 CFR 1308.13(e)), 1400 dosage units of clonazepam (a schedule IV controlled substance, 21 CFR 1308.14(c)), as well as drugs combining codeine with acetaminophen or aspirin. Respondent admitted that he personally used the drugs. The record also shows that on September 24, 2005, Respondent represented to an employee of Henry 4 Having considered all of the factors, I conclude that factors one, three and five are not relevant. VerDate Aug<31>2005 21:40 Dec 18, 2007 Jkt 214001 Schein, Inc., that he was ‘‘practic[ing] general medicine,’’ with a ‘‘concentration in chronic pain secondary to terminal illness, i.e., cancer.’’ During the August 31, 2006 interview, however, Respondent admitted that he had not practiced medicine since 1997 and that he had no patients. The record further shows that after he faxed the letter to Schein, Respondent continued to order and received large quantities of controlled substances from it. Based on this evidence, I conclude that on numerous occasions, Respondent violated federal law by ‘‘knowingly or intentionally * * * acquir[ing] or obtain[ing] possession of a controlled substance by misrepresentation, fraud, [or] deception.’’ 21 U.S.C. 843(a)(3). Respondent further admitted that he did not maintain the purchasing and dispensing records as required by federal law. See id. § 827(a)(3). Based on the above, I conclude that Respondent’s record of non-compliance with federal laws related to controlled substances and his experience of self-dispensing controlled substances, establishes that granting him a registration would be ‘‘inconsistent with the public interest.’’ Id. § 823(f). Order Consequently, the investigation has been terminated. Signed at Washington, DC, this 12th day of December, 2007. Linda G. Poole, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E7–24544 Filed 12–18–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA–W–62,510 and TA–W–62,510A] Cuno, Inc., Meriden, CT and Enfield, CT; Notice of Termination of Investigation Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on November 29, 2007 in response to a petition filed by a State agency representative on behalf of workers of two locations of Cuno, Inc., namely Meriden, Connecticut (TA–W–62,510) and Enfield, Connecticut (TA–W–62,510A). The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. Consequently, the investigation has been terminated. Pursuant to the authority vested in me by 21 U.S.C. 823(f), as well as 28 CFR 0.100(b) & 0.104, I order that the application of Patrick K. Riggs, M.D., for a DEA Certificate of Registration as a practitioner be, and it hereby is, denied. This order is effective January 18, 2008. Signed in Washington, DC, this 13th day of December 2007. Linda G. Poole, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E7–24546 Filed 12–18–07; 8:45 am] Dated: December 7, 2007. Michele M. Leonhart, Deputy Administrator. [FR Doc. E7–24608 Filed 12–18–07; 8:45 am] DEPARTMENT OF LABOR BILLING CODE 4410–09–P BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P Employment and Training Administration [TA–W–62,426] DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Flextronics Enclosures, Including OnSite Leased Workers of Manpower and Coast Personnel, Youngsville, NC; Notice of Termination of Investigation Employment and Training Administration [TA–W–62,418] Computer Sciences Corporation, Dallas, Texas; Notice of Termination of Investigation Pursuant to section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on November 6, 2007 in response to a petition filed by a company official on behalf of workers of Computer Sciences Corporation, Dallas, Texas. The company official has requested that the petition be withdrawn. PO 00000 Frm 00090 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Pursuant to section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on November 7, 2007, in response to a worker petition filed on behalf of workers at Flextronics Enclosures, Youngsville, North Carolina. The petitioning group of workers is covered by an active certification, (TA– W–62,486) which expires on November 7, 2009. Consequently, further investigation in this case would serve no purpose, and the investigation has been terminated. E:\FR\FM\19DEN1.SGM 19DEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 243 (Wednesday, December 19, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 71959-71960]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-24608]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration


Patrick K. Riggs, M.D.; Denial of Application

    On June 19, 2007, the Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of 
Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration, issued an Order to 
Show Cause to Patrick K. Riggs (Respondent), of Fort Worth, Texas. The 
Show Cause Order proposed the denial of Respondent's pending 
application for a DEA Certificate of Registration as a practitioner, on 
the ground that his registration would be ``inconsistent with the 
public interest.'' Show Cause Order at 1 (citing 21 U.S.C. 823(f) & 
824(a)(4)).
    The Show Cause Order specifically alleged that ``from May 2005 
through August 2006 [Respondent], ordered 22,500 dosage units of 
hydrocodone from Henry Schein, Inc.,'' and that notwithstanding his 
``assertions to Henry Schein, Inc., that [he was] practicing medicine 
during that period [Respondent], subsequently admitted to DEA Diversion 
Investigators that [he] had not practiced medicine since 1997 and had 
no current patients.'' Id. The Show Cause Order alleged that on August 
31, 2006, Respondent had met with DEA Diversion Investigators at his 
home and admitted to them that he had consumed all of the hydrocodone 
drugs that he had obtained from Henry Schein, Inc. Id.
    The Show Cause Order further alleged that Respondent did not 
maintain the purchasing and dispensing records required under federal 
law for the controlled substances he had obtained from Henry Schein, 
Inc. Id. Finally, the Show Cause Order alleged that during the 
aforementioned meeting with DEA investigators, Respondent had upon the 
advice of counsel, voluntarily surrendered his DEA Registration and 
agreed not to apply for a new registration for a two-year period. Id. 
at 2.
    On June 25, 2007, the Show Cause Order, which also notified 
Respondent of his right to request a hearing on the allegations, was 
served on him by a Federal Express delivery to his residence, which is 
also the address of his proposed registered location. Because: (1) More 
than thirty days have passed since service of the Show Cause Order, and 
(2) neither Respondent, nor anyone purporting to represent him, has 
requested a hearing, I conclude that Respondent has waived his right to 
a hearing. See 21 CFR 1301.43(d). I therefore enter this Final Order 
without a hearing based on relevant material contained in the 
investigative file, see id. 1301.43(e), and make the following 
findings.

Findings

    Respondent previously held a DEA Registration as a practitioner, 
which authorized him to dispense controlled substances in schedules II 
through V. On various dates between May 2005 and August 2006, DEA 
received several reports from Henry Schein, Inc., regarding 
Respondent's excessive purchases of controlled substances. These 
reports showed that during the above period, Respondent purchased 
22,500 dosage units of combination hydrocodone/acetaminophen (all in 
10/325 mg. strength), 1400 dosage units of clonazepam (in both 1 mg. 
and 2 mg. strength), 1200 dosage units of aspirin with codeine (60 
mg.), 500 dosage units of acetaminophen with codeine (60 mg.), and 
hydrocodone with ibuprofen (7.5/200 mg.).\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The reports also showed that Respondent had purchased two 
anabolic steroids, nandrolone and testosterone cypionate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Sometime around September 2005, a Schein employee apparently 
questioned Respondent regarding his purchases. Accordingly, on 
September 24, 2005, Respondent faxed a letter which stated that he had 
served as ``a consultant to the TXSBME'' \2\ from 1995 through 1998 
``in the area of disciplinary action,'' and had ``earned * * * a great 
many enemies (because of my testimony in med[ical] malpractice cases 
for the state.'' Respondent further wrote that he was engaged in the 
practice of ``general medicine,'' and that his ``patient base is 
select. The concentration is chronic pain secondary to terminal 
illness[,] i.e., cancer.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Presumably, the Texas State Board of Medical Examiners.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On August 31, 2006, DEA investigators went to Respondent's 
residence (and registered location) and met with Respondent and his 
attorney regarding his excessive purchases. During the interview, 
Respondent was asked what medications he took. Respondent went to 
another room and retrieved approximately twenty-five containers of non-
controlled prescription drugs. Upon further questioning, Respondent 
admitted that he had been on methadone and pulled an empty container of 
methadone from his pocket.
    During the interview, Respondent also admitted that he had not 
practiced medicine since 1997 and did not have any patients. One of the 
investigators then presented to Respondent's attorney a spreadsheet 
listing his controlled substance purchases from Schein. After 
Respondent and his lawyer were allowed to privately discuss the matter, 
Respondent admitted that he had used all of the controlled substances 
which he had purchased from Schein. Respondent also stated that to 
prevent damaging his liver, he had ground up the hydrocodone tablets to 
separate out the acetaminophen. Respondent also admitted that he had 
failed to maintain purchasing and dispensing records as required by 
Federal law.
    Based on this information, the investigators advised Respondent's 
counsel that they would seek an Order to Show Cause to revoke his 
registration unless he voluntarily surrendered it. After consulting 
with his attorney, Respondent voluntarily surrendered his registration 
and signed the applicable form.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ On the form, Respondent also ``agree[d] not to re apply for 
a period of two years.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Two months later, on October 30, 2006, Respondent submitted an 
application for a new registration. On the form, Respondent 
acknowledged that he had surrendered his registration and explained 
that ``[t]he surrender[] could be classified as a misunderstanding 
secondary to misinformation. I view it[] as an unusual set of 
unnecessary and

[[Page 71960]]

humiliating circumstances brought together by a malicious third 
party.''

Discussion

    Section 303(f) of the Controlled Substances Act provides that 
``[t]he Attorney General shall register practitioners * * * to dispense 
* * * controlled substances in schedule II, III, IV, or V, if the 
applicant is authorized to dispense * * * controlled substances under 
the laws of the State in which he practices.'' 21 U.S.C. 823(f). 
Section 303(f) further provides that ``[t]he Attorney General may deny 
an application for such registration if he determines that the issuance 
of such registration would be inconsistent with the public interest.'' 
Id. In making the public interest determination, the Act requires the 
consideration of the following factors:

    (1) The recommendation of the appropriate State licensing board 
or professional disciplinary authority.
    (2) The applicant's experience in dispensing * * * controlled 
substances.
    (3) The applicant's conviction record under Federal or State 
laws relating to the manufacture, distribution, or dispensing of 
controlled substances.
    (4) Compliance with applicable State, Federal, or local laws 
relating to controlled substances.
    (5) Such other conduct which may threaten the public health and 
safety.

Id.
    [T]hese factors are * * * considered in the disjunctive.'' Robert 
A. Leslie, M.D., 68 FR 15227, 15230 (2003). I ``may rely on any one or 
a combination of factors, and may give each factor the weight [I] 
deem[] appropriate in determining whether a registration should be 
revoked.'' Id. Moreover, I am ``not required to make findings as to all 
of the factors.'' Hoxie v. DEA, 419 F.3d 477, 482 (6th Cir. 2005); see 
also Morall v. DEA, 412 F.3d 165, 173-74 (D.C. Cir. 2005). In this 
case, I conclude that factors two and four are dispositive.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Having considered all of the factors, I conclude that 
factors one, three and five are not relevant.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As the record demonstrates, Respondent acquired large quantities of 
controlled substances including 22,500 tablets of combination 
hydrocodone/acetaminophen (a schedule III controlled substance, 21 CFR 
1308.13(e)), 1400 dosage units of clonazepam (a schedule IV controlled 
substance, 21 CFR 1308.14(c)), as well as drugs combining codeine with 
acetaminophen or aspirin. Respondent admitted that he personally used 
the drugs.
    The record also shows that on September 24, 2005, Respondent 
represented to an employee of Henry Schein, Inc., that he was 
``practic[ing] general medicine,'' with a ``concentration in chronic 
pain secondary to terminal illness, i.e., cancer.'' During the August 
31, 2006 interview, however, Respondent admitted that he had not 
practiced medicine since 1997 and that he had no patients. The record 
further shows that after he faxed the letter to Schein, Respondent 
continued to order and received large quantities of controlled 
substances from it. Based on this evidence, I conclude that on numerous 
occasions, Respondent violated federal law by ``knowingly or 
intentionally * * * acquir[ing] or obtain[ing] possession of a 
controlled substance by misrepresentation, fraud, [or] deception.'' 21 
U.S.C. 843(a)(3).
    Respondent further admitted that he did not maintain the purchasing 
and dispensing records as required by federal law. See id. Sec.  
827(a)(3). Based on the above, I conclude that Respondent's record of 
non-compliance with federal laws related to controlled substances and 
his experience of self-dispensing controlled substances, establishes 
that granting him a registration would be ``inconsistent with the 
public interest.'' Id. Sec.  823(f).

Order

    Pursuant to the authority vested in me by 21 U.S.C. 823(f), as well 
as 28 CFR 0.100(b) & 0.104, I order that the application of Patrick K. 
Riggs, M.D., for a DEA Certificate of Registration as a practitioner 
be, and it hereby is, denied. This order is effective January 18, 2008.

    Dated: December 7, 2007.
Michele M. Leonhart,
Deputy Administrator.
 [FR Doc. E7-24608 Filed 12-18-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-P