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

Agencies

• Drug Enforcement Administration
• Department of Justice

[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