Sai Wentum, M.D.; Decision and Order, 49024 [2012-20008]
Download as PDF
49024
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 158 / Wednesday, August 15, 2012 / Notices
During the public comment period,
the Consent Decree may also be
examined on the following Department
of Justice Web site: https://www.usdoj.
gov/enrd/Consent_Decrees.html. A copy
of the Consent Decree may also be
obtained by mail from the Consent
Decree library, P.O. Box 7611, U.S.
Department of Justice, Washington, DC
20044–7611, or by faxing or emailing a
request to ‘‘Consent Decree Copy’’
(EESCDCopy.ENRD@udoj.gov), fax no.
(202) 514–0097, phone confirmation
number (202) 514–5271. If requesting a
copy from the Consent Decree library by
mail, please enclose a check in the
amount of $10.00 (40 pages at 25 cents
per page reproduction cost) payable to
the U.S. Treasury or, if requesting by
email or fax, forward a check in that
amount to the Consent Decree Library at
the address given above.
either, and the consequences for failing
to do either. Id. at 2 (citing 21 CFR
1301.43(a), (c), (d), & (e)). On March 28,
2012, the Show Cause Order was served
on Respondent by certified mail
addressed to him at his registered
locations in both Nashville, Tennessee
and Detroit, Michigan. GX 5 & GX 6.
Since the date of service of the Show
Cause Order, thirty days have now
passed and neither Registrant, nor
anyone purporting to represent him, has
requested a hearing or submitted a
statement in lieu of a hearing. I therefore
find that Registrant has waived his right
to a hearing or to submit a written
statement in lieu of a hearing and issue
this Decision and Final Order based on
relevant evidence contained in the
record submitted by the Government. 21
CFR 1301.43(d) & (e). I make the
following findings of fact.
Robert E. Maher, Jr.,
Assistant Section Chief, Environmental
Enforcement Section, Environment and
Natural Resources Division.
Findings
Registrant is the holder of DEA
Certificate of Registration FW2529672,
which authorizes him to dispense
controlled substances in schedules II
through V, as a practitioner, at the
registered address of 213 W. Maplewood
Lane, Suite 400, Nashville, Tennessee
37207. GX 1. His registration has an
expiration date of May 31, 2014. Id.
By letter dated June 7, 2011, the
Tennessee Board of Medical Examiners
(hereinafter, the Board) notified
Registrant that the Board had voted to
deny his application for licensure as a
medical doctor and that his temporary
license, previously issued on April 1,
2011, had been rescinded. GX 2. After
Registrant appealed the Board’s decision
to deny his application for licensure, the
Board issued an Agreed Order on
November 16, 2011. GX 3. The Board
found that Registrant is not qualified to
obtain a Tennessee medical license
because he is not a graduate of a boardapproved international medical school,
as required by Tenn. Code Ann. § 63–6–
207 and Tenn. Comp. R. & Reg. Rule
0880–02–04. Id. at 3. Registrant
admitted the truth of the allegations
contained in the Agreed Order. Id. at 2.
Accordingly, the Board denied
Registrant’s application for licensure as
a medical doctor. Id. at 4. I therefore
find that Registrant currently lacks
authority under Tennessee law to
dispense controlled substances.
[FR Doc. 2012–20047 Filed 8–14–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Drug Enforcement Administration
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Sai Wentum, M.D.; Decision and Order
On March 20, 2012, the Deputy
Assistant Administrator, Office of
Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement
Administration, issued an Order to
Show Cause to Sai Wentum, M.D.
(Registrant), of Nashville, Tennessee.
GX 4. The Show Cause Order proposed
the revocation of Registrant’s DEA
Certificate of Registration FW2529672,
which authorizes him to dispense
controlled substances as a practitioner,
on the ground that Registrant does not
possess authority under the laws of the
State of Tennessee, the State in which
he is registered with DEA, to dispense
controlled substances. Id. at 1 (citing 21
U.S.C. 824(a)(3)). In particular, the
Show Cause Order alleged that
Registrant is currently unlicensed to
practice medicine and without authority
to handle controlled substances in the
State of Tennessee as a result of ‘‘actions
by the Tennessee Board of Medical
Examiners.’’ 1 Id.
The Show Cause Order also notified
Registrant of his right to request a
hearing on the allegations or to submit
a written statement regarding the
matters of fact and law asserted in lieu
of a hearing, the procedures for doing
1 The Show Cause Order does not specifically set
forth the actions allegedly taken by the Tennessee
Board of Medical Examiners. See GX 4, at 1.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:25 Aug 14, 2012
Jkt 226001
Discussion
The Controlled Substances Act (CSA)
grants the Attorney General authority to
revoke a registration ‘‘upon a finding
that the registrant * * * has had his
State license or registration suspended
[or] revoked * * * and is no longer
authorized by State law to engage in the
* * * distribution [or] dispensing of
PO 00000
Frm 00077
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
controlled substances.’’ 21 U.S.C.
824(a)(3). Moreover, DEA has long held
that a practitioner must be currently
authorized to handle controlled
substances in the jurisdiction in which
he practices in order to maintain a DEA
registration. See Gerald T. Hanley, 53
FR 5658 (1988). This rule derives from
the text of the CSA, which defines ‘‘the
term ‘practitioner’ [to] mean[] a * * *
physician * * * or other person
licensed, registered or otherwise
permitted, by * * * the jurisdiction in
which he practices * * * to distribute,
dispense, [or] administer * * * a
controlled substance in the course of
professional practice,’’ 21 U.S.C.
802(21), and which imposes, as a
condition for obtaining a registration,
that a practitioner be authorized to
dispense controlled substances under
the laws of the State in which he
practices. See id. § 823(f) (‘‘The
Attorney General shall register
practitioners * * * if the applicant is
authorized to dispense * * * controlled
substances under the laws of the State
in which he practices.’’).
As these provisions make plain,
possessing authority under state law to
dispense controlled substances is an
essential condition for holding a DEA
registration. See David W. Wang, 72 FR
54297, 54298 (2007); Sheran Arden
Yeates, 71 FR 39130, 39131 (2006);
Dominick A. Ricci, 58 FR 51104, 51105
(1993); Bobby Watts, 53 FR 11919,
11920 (1988). DEA has therefore
consistently held that revocation is the
appropriate sanction whenever a
practitioner has lost his state authority
to dispense controlled substances.
James L. Hooper, 76 FR 71371, 71372–
73 (2011) (collecting cases), pet. for rev.
denied Hooper v. Holder, No. 11–2351,
2012 WL 2020079 (4th Cir. June 6, 2012)
(unpublished).
Because Registrant no longer has
authority to dispense controlled
substances in the State in which he
holds his DEA registration, he is not
entitled to maintain his DEA
registration. See 21 U.S.C. 802(21),
823(f), and 824(a)(3). Accordingly,
Registrant’s registration will be revoked.
Order
Pursuant to the authority vested in me
by 21 U.S.C. 824(a), as well as 28 CFR
0.100(b), I order that DEA Certificate of
Registration FW2529672, issued to Sai
Wentum, M.D., be, and it hereby is,
revoked. This Order is effective
September 14, 2012.
Dated: July 31, 2012
Michele M. Leonhart,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2012–20008 Filed 8–14–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–09–P
E:\FR\FM\15AUN1.SGM
15AUN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 158 (Wednesday, August 15, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 49024]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-20008]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Drug Enforcement Administration
Sai Wentum, M.D.; Decision and Order
On March 20, 2012, the Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of
Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration, issued an Order to
Show Cause to Sai Wentum, M.D. (Registrant), of Nashville, Tennessee.
GX 4. The Show Cause Order proposed the revocation of Registrant's DEA
Certificate of Registration FW2529672, which authorizes him to dispense
controlled substances as a practitioner, on the ground that Registrant
does not possess authority under the laws of the State of Tennessee,
the State in which he is registered with DEA, to dispense controlled
substances. Id. at 1 (citing 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3)). In particular, the
Show Cause Order alleged that Registrant is currently unlicensed to
practice medicine and without authority to handle controlled substances
in the State of Tennessee as a result of ``actions by the Tennessee
Board of Medical Examiners.'' \1\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Show Cause Order does not specifically set forth the
actions allegedly taken by the Tennessee Board of Medical Examiners.
See GX 4, at 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Show Cause Order also notified Registrant of his right to
request a hearing on the allegations or to submit a written statement
regarding the matters of fact and law asserted in lieu of a hearing,
the procedures for doing either, and the consequences for failing to do
either. Id. at 2 (citing 21 CFR 1301.43(a), (c), (d), & (e)). On March
28, 2012, the Show Cause Order was served on Respondent by certified
mail addressed to him at his registered locations in both Nashville,
Tennessee and Detroit, Michigan. GX 5 & GX 6. Since the date of service
of the Show Cause Order, thirty days have now passed and neither
Registrant, nor anyone purporting to represent him, has requested a
hearing or submitted a statement in lieu of a hearing. I therefore find
that Registrant has waived his right to a hearing or to submit a
written statement in lieu of a hearing and issue this Decision and
Final Order based on relevant evidence contained in the record
submitted by the Government. 21 CFR 1301.43(d) & (e). I make the
following findings of fact.
Findings
Registrant is the holder of DEA Certificate of Registration
FW2529672, which authorizes him to dispense controlled substances in
schedules II through V, as a practitioner, at the registered address of
213 W. Maplewood Lane, Suite 400, Nashville, Tennessee 37207. GX 1. His
registration has an expiration date of May 31, 2014. Id.
By letter dated June 7, 2011, the Tennessee Board of Medical
Examiners (hereinafter, the Board) notified Registrant that the Board
had voted to deny his application for licensure as a medical doctor and
that his temporary license, previously issued on April 1, 2011, had
been rescinded. GX 2. After Registrant appealed the Board's decision to
deny his application for licensure, the Board issued an Agreed Order on
November 16, 2011. GX 3. The Board found that Registrant is not
qualified to obtain a Tennessee medical license because he is not a
graduate of a board-approved international medical school, as required
by Tenn. Code Ann. Sec. 63-6-207 and Tenn. Comp. R. & Reg. Rule 0880-
02-04. Id. at 3. Registrant admitted the truth of the allegations
contained in the Agreed Order. Id. at 2. Accordingly, the Board denied
Registrant's application for licensure as a medical doctor. Id. at 4. I
therefore find that Registrant currently lacks authority under
Tennessee law to dispense controlled substances.
Discussion
The Controlled Substances Act (CSA) grants the Attorney General
authority to revoke a registration ``upon a finding that the registrant
* * * has had his State license or registration suspended [or] revoked
* * * and is no longer authorized by State law to engage in the * * *
distribution [or] dispensing of controlled substances.'' 21 U.S.C.
824(a)(3). Moreover, DEA has long held that a practitioner must be
currently authorized to handle controlled substances in the
jurisdiction in which he practices in order to maintain a DEA
registration. See Gerald T. Hanley, 53 FR 5658 (1988). This rule
derives from the text of the CSA, which defines ``the term
`practitioner' [to] mean[] a * * * physician * * * or other person
licensed, registered or otherwise permitted, by * * * the jurisdiction
in which he practices * * * to distribute, dispense, [or] administer *
* * a controlled substance in the course of professional practice,'' 21
U.S.C. 802(21), and which imposes, as a condition for obtaining a
registration, that a practitioner be authorized to dispense controlled
substances under the laws of the State in which he practices. See id.
Sec. 823(f) (``The Attorney General shall register practitioners * * *
if the applicant is authorized to dispense * * * controlled substances
under the laws of the State in which he practices.'').
As these provisions make plain, possessing authority under state
law to dispense controlled substances is an essential condition for
holding a DEA registration. See David W. Wang, 72 FR 54297, 54298
(2007); Sheran Arden Yeates, 71 FR 39130, 39131 (2006); Dominick A.
Ricci, 58 FR 51104, 51105 (1993); Bobby Watts, 53 FR 11919, 11920
(1988). DEA has therefore consistently held that revocation is the
appropriate sanction whenever a practitioner has lost his state
authority to dispense controlled substances. James L. Hooper, 76 FR
71371, 71372-73 (2011) (collecting cases), pet. for rev. denied Hooper
v. Holder, No. 11-2351, 2012 WL 2020079 (4th Cir. June 6, 2012)
(unpublished).
Because Registrant no longer has authority to dispense controlled
substances in the State in which he holds his DEA registration, he is
not entitled to maintain his DEA registration. See 21 U.S.C. 802(21),
823(f), and 824(a)(3). Accordingly, Registrant's registration will be
revoked.
Order
Pursuant to the authority vested in me by 21 U.S.C. 824(a), as well
as 28 CFR 0.100(b), I order that DEA Certificate of Registration
FW2529672, issued to Sai Wentum, M.D., be, and it hereby is, revoked.
This Order is effective September 14, 2012.
Dated: July 31, 2012
Michele M. Leonhart,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2012-20008 Filed 8-14-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-P