First Choice Surgery Center of Baton Rouge, L.L.C.; Decision and Order, 55642-55643 [2017-25288]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
55642
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 22, 2017 / Notices
The Drug Enforcement
Administration (DEA) has considered
the factors in 21 U.S.C. 823(a) and
determined that the registration of these
registrants to manufacture the
applicable basic classes of controlled
substances is consistent with the public
interest and with United States
obligations under international treaties,
conventions, or protocols in effect on
May 1, 1971. The DEA investigated each
of the company’s maintenance of
effective controls against diversion by
inspecting and testing each company’s
physical security systems, verifying
each company’s compliance with state
and local laws, and reviewing each
company’s background and history.
Therefore, pursuant to 21 U.S.C.
823(a), and in accordance with 21 CFR
1301.33, the DEA has granted a
registration as a bulk manufacturer to
the above listed persons.
Dated: November 16, 2017.
Demetra Ashley,
Acting Assistant Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2017–25285 Filed 11–21–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–09–P
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Drug Enforcement Administration
[Docket No. 17–35]
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
First Choice Surgery Center of Baton
Rouge, L.L.C.; Decision and Order
On May 24, 2017, the Assistant
Administrator, Diversion Control
Division, issued an Order to Show
Cause to First Choice Surgery Center of
Baton Rouge, L.L.C (Respondent), of
Baton Rouge, Louisiana. The Show
Cause Order proposed the revocation of
Respondent’s DEA Certificate of
Registration No. FF4394209, on the
ground that ‘‘the clinic does not have
authority to dispense controlled
substances in Louisiana, the [S]tate in
which the clinic is located.’’ Show
Cause Order, at 1 (citing 21 U.S.C. 823(f)
and 824(a)(3)). The Show Cause Order
also proposed revocation on the ground
that Respondent’s owner, ‘‘Dr. Arnold
Feldman, M.D., has been found guilty
by the Louisiana State Board of Medical
Examiners of misconduct related to
controlled substances.’’ Id. (citing 21
U.S.C. 823(f) and 824(a)(2); 21 CFR
1306.04).
As to the jurisdictional basis for the
proceeding, the Show Cause Order
alleged that Respondent is ‘‘registered
. . . as a hospital/clinic in [s]chedules
II–V pursuant to [Registration No.]
FF4394209 at 505 East Airport Drive,
Baton Rouge, Louisiana.’’ Id. at 2. The
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:57 Nov 21, 2017
Jkt 244001
Order alleged that this registration does
not expire until ‘‘September 30, 2019.’’
Id.
As to the substantive grounds for the
proceeding, the Show Cause Order
alleged that Respondent ‘‘is without
authority to dispense controlled
substances in Louisiana.’’ Id. The Show
Cause Order alleged that while
Respondent ‘‘previously held’’ a
Louisiana controlled substance license,
‘‘[t]his license expired on September 23,
2016 and has not been renewed.’’ Id.
The Order then asserted that ‘‘based
upon [Respondent’s] lack of [s]tate
authority to dispense controlled
substances in . . . Louisiana,’’ its
registration must be revoked. Id.
As to the allegation based on its
owner’s misconduct, the Show Cause
Order alleged that ‘‘[o]n August 15,
2016, the Louisiana State Board of
Medical Examiners found [Respondent’s
owner] guilty of violating [state law] by
giving his staff pre-signed controlled
substance prescriptions and/or allowing
his staff to utilize a ‘Ghost writer’ to
affix his signature to controlled
substances prescriptions.’’ Id. The Order
further alleged that its owner’s conduct
violated 21 U.S.C. 841(a)(1) and 21 CFR
1306.04. Id.
The Show Cause Order notified
Respondent of its right to request a
hearing on the allegations or to submit
a written statement while waiving its
right to a hearing and the procedure for
electing either option. Id. (citing 21 CFR
1301.43). In addition, the Order notified
Respondent of its right to submit a
corrective action plan pursuant to 21
U.S.C. 824(c)(2)(C). Id. at 3–4.
On June 15, 2017, Respondent,
through its counsel, requested a hearing
on the allegations. Letter from
Respondent to Hearing Clerk, Office of
Administrative Law Judges (June 15,
2017). The matter was assigned to
Administrative Law Judge Charles Wm.
Dorman (hereinafter, ALJ), who, on June
16, 2017, issued an order directing the
Government to file evidence supporting
the allegations by June 29, 2017 at 2
p.m., as well any motion for summary
disposition. Briefing Schedule For Lack
Of State Authority Allegations, at 1. The
ALJ’s order also provided that if the
Government moved for summary
disposition, Respondent’s opposition
was due by July 13, 2017 at 2 p.m. Id.
On June 20, 2017, the Government
filed its Motion for Summary
Disposition. In its Motion, the
Government argued that Respondent is
a ‘‘practitioner’’ under the CSA and that
because its ‘‘state authority has
terminated, [it] no longer meets the
statutory definition of a practitioner’’
and is not entitled to maintain its
PO 00000
Frm 00090
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
registration. Motion, at 3. The
Government thus sought a
Recommendation that Respondent’s
registration be revoked. Id.
As support for its motion, the
Government provided: (1) A copy of
Respondent’s registration; (2) a letter
dated May 22, 2017 from the Assistant
Executive Director of the Louisiana
Board of Pharmacy to a DEA Diversion
Investigator (DI) stating that
Respondent’s Louisiana Controlled
Dangerous Substance (CDS) license
expired September 23, 2016; (3) a
November 16, 2016 Order of the
Louisiana Board of Pharmacy
indefinitely suspending the Controlled
Dangerous Substance license of Arnold
E. Feldman based on the suspension of
his Louisiana Medical license; and (4) a
declaration of the aforementioned DI
that Respondent ‘‘currently has no
authority to handle controlled
substances in Louisiana.’’ Mot. for
Summ. Disp., Appendices A, B, and C.
The Government did not, however, seek
summary disposition based on the
allegation that Respondent’s owner had
been found guilty by the Louisiana
Board of misconduct related to
controlled substances. Compare Mot. for
Summ. Disp. with Show Cause Order, at
1–2.
Respondent did not file a Reply to the
Government’s Motion, and on July 25,
2017, the ALJ granted the Government’s
Motion. Order Granting Summary
Disposition (R.D.), at 3, 6. Noting that
the Government had ‘‘provided a
certified letter from the Louisiana Board
of Pharmacy indicating that the
Respondent held Louisiana Board of
Pharmacy Number CDS.043803–ASC,
but that this license expired on
September 23, 2016,’’ id. at 2, the ALJ
found it ‘‘undisputed that the
Respondent lacks state authorization to
dispense controlled substances in
Louisiana, where [it] is registered.’’ Id.
at 5. Applying the Agency’s
longstanding rule ‘‘that a practitioner
must be currently authorized to
dispense controlled substances by the
State in which [it] practices in order to
obtain and maintain a registration,’’ id.
at 4 (citation omitted), the ALJ
concluded that ‘‘Respondent cannot
maintain a DEA registration for any
location in’’ Louisiana and
recommended that I revoke its
registration.1 Id. at 5–6.
1 With respect to the allegation that Respondent’s
owner had been found guilty of misconduct by the
Louisiana Board of Medical Examiners, the ALJ
noted that [t]he Government did not provide any
argument or evidence in its Motion.’’ R.D. 6 n.1.
However, as the ALJ observed, ‘‘Respondent’s lack
of state authority to dispense controlled substances
E:\FR\FM\22NON1.SGM
22NON1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 22, 2017 / Notices
Having considered the record, I adopt
the ALJ’s finding of fact that
Respondent’s Louisiana CDS license has
expired and his of conclusion of law
that Respondent lacks state
authorization to dispense controlled
substances in Louisiana. I will therefore
adopt the ALJ’s recommendation that I
revoke Respondent’s registration. I make
the following findings.
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
Findings of Fact
Respondent is the holder of DEA
Certificate of Registration No.
FF4394209, pursuant to which it is
authorized to dispense controlled
substances in schedules II through V as
a Hospital/Clinic, at the registered
address of: First Choice Surgery Center
of Baton Rouge, L.L.C., 505 East Airport
Drive, Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Mot. for
Summ. Disp., Appendix A. This
registration does not expire until
September 30, 2019. Id. Respondent is
owned by Arnold E. Feldman, M.D.
Resp.’s Hrng. Req, at 1.
Respondent also previously held
Louisiana Controlled Dangerous
Substance License No.043803–ASC. Id.,
at Appendix B. However, Respondent
allowed this license to expire on
September 23, 2016. Id.
Accordingly, I find that Respondent
currently lacks authority to dispense
controlled substances under the laws of
the State of Louisiana.
Discussion
Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3), the
Attorney General is authorized to
suspend or revoke a registration issued
under section 823 of the Controlled
Substances Act (CSA), ‘‘upon a finding
that the registrant . . . has had [its]
State license . . . suspended [or]
revoked . . . by competent State
authority and is no longer authorized by
State law to engage in the . . .
dispensing of controlled substances.’’
With respect to a practitioner, which
includes a hospital or clinic, see 21
U.S.C. 802(21), DEA has long held that
the possession of authority to dispense
controlled substances under the laws of
the State in which a practitioner engages
in professional practice is a
fundamental condition for obtaining
and maintaining a practitioner’s
registration. See, e.g., James L. Hooper,
76 FR 71371 (2011), pet. for rev. denied,
481 Fed. Appx. 826 (4th Cir. 2012);
Frederick Marsh Blanton, 43 FR 27616
(1978).
This rule derives from the text of two
other provisions of the CSA, section
802(21), which defines the term
is a sufficient independent ground to recommend
the revocation of [its] registration.’’ Id.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:09 Nov 21, 2017
Jkt 244001
‘‘practitioner,’’ and section 823(f),
which sets forth the registration
requirements for practitioners. Notably,
in section 802(21), Congress defined
‘‘the term ‘practitioner’ [to] mean[ ] a
. . . physician . . . hospital, 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)
(emphasis added). The text of this
provision makes clear that a hospital is
not a practitioner within the meaning of
the CSA if it is not ‘‘licensed, registered
or otherwise permitted, by the
jurisdiction in which [it] practices . . .
to dispense [or] administer . . . a
controlled substance in the course of
professional practice.’’ Id.
To the same effect, Congress, in
setting the requirements for obtaining a
practitioner’s registration, directed that
‘‘[t]he Attorney General shall register
practitioners . . . if the applicant is
authorized to dispense . . . controlled
substances under the laws of the State
in which [it] practices.’’ 21 U.S.C.
823(f). Based on these provisions, the
Agency held nearly forty years ago that
‘‘[s]tate authorization to dispense or
otherwise handle controlled substances
is a prerequisite to the issuance and
maintenance of a Federal controlled
substances registration.’’ Blanton, 43 FR
at 27617 (revoking physician’s
registration based on one-year
suspension of his state license)
(emphasis added).
Having allowed its Louisiana CDS
license to expire, Respondent is no
longer authorized to dispense controlled
substances in the State.2 Because
Congress has clearly mandated that a
practitioner possess state authority in
order to be deemed a practitioner under
the Act, and Respondent is no longer
authorized to dispense controlled
substances under the laws of Louisiana,
the State in which it is registered, I
adopt the ALJ’s recommended order and
will order that its registration be
revoked. See, e.g., Hooper, 76 FR at
71371–72; Sheran Arden Yeates, 71 FR
39130, 39131 (2006); Dominick A. Ricci,
58 FR 51104, 51105 (1993); Bobby
Watts, 53 FR 11919, 11920 (1988);
Blanton, 43 FR at 27616.
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
2 Subsequent to the ALJ’s issuance of his
Recommended Decision, Respondent has not filed
a motion supported by any evidence that its CDS
license has been reinstated with either the ALJ or
my Office.
PO 00000
Frm 00091
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
55643
Registration No. FF4394209 issued to
First Choice Surgery Center of Baton
Rouge, L.L.C., be, and it hereby is,
revoked. This order is effective
immediately.3
Dated: November 13, 2017.
Robert W. Patterson,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2017–25288 Filed 11–21–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–09–P
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND
SPACE ADMINISTRATION
[Notice: 17– 087]
NASA Advisory Council; Meeting
National Aeronautics and
Space Administration.
ACTION: Notice of meeting.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
Federal Advisory Committee Act, as
amended, the National Aeronautics and
Space Administration (NASA)
announces a meeting of the NASA
Advisory Council (NAC).
DATES: Thursday, December 7, 2017,
1:00–5:00 p.m.; and Friday, December 8,
2017, 9:00 a.m.–12:00 noon, Local Time.
ADDRESSES: NASA Headquarters,
Program Review Center (PRC), Room
9H40, 300 E Street SW., Washington, DC
20546.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Marla King, NAC Administrative
Officer, NASA Headquarters,
Washington, DC 20546, (202) 358–1148
or marla.k.king@nasa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This
meeting will be open to the public up
to the capacity of the meeting room.
This meeting is also available
telephonically and by WebEx. You must
use a touch-tone phone to participate in
this meeting. Any interested person may
dial the Toll Number 1–630–395–0139
or Toll Free Number 1–888–603–9606
and then the numeric passcode
8148619, followed by the # sign, on both
days. Note: If dialing in, please ‘‘mute’’
your phone. To join via WebEx, the link
is https://nasa.webex.com/. The meeting
number on December 7 is 996 950 837
and the meeting password is
NACDEC717! (case sensitive); the
meeting number on December 8 is 997
757 737 and the meeting password is
NACDEC817@(case sensitive).
SUMMARY:
3 As found above, Respondent is owned by Dr.
Arnold E. Feldman. For the same reasons which led
the former Acting Administrator to revoke Dr.
Feldman’s Louisiana registration with an immediate
effective date, see Arnold E. Feldman, 82 FR 39614,
39618 & n.8 (2017), I conclude that the public
interest necessitates that this Order be effective
immediately. 21 CFR 1316.67.
E:\FR\FM\22NON1.SGM
22NON1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 224 (Wednesday, November 22, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55642-55643]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-25288]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Drug Enforcement Administration
[Docket No. 17-35]
First Choice Surgery Center of Baton Rouge, L.L.C.; Decision and
Order
On May 24, 2017, the Assistant Administrator, Diversion Control
Division, issued an Order to Show Cause to First Choice Surgery Center
of Baton Rouge, L.L.C (Respondent), of Baton Rouge, Louisiana. The Show
Cause Order proposed the revocation of Respondent's DEA Certificate of
Registration No. FF4394209, on the ground that ``the clinic does not
have authority to dispense controlled substances in Louisiana, the
[S]tate in which the clinic is located.'' Show Cause Order, at 1
(citing 21 U.S.C. 823(f) and 824(a)(3)). The Show Cause Order also
proposed revocation on the ground that Respondent's owner, ``Dr. Arnold
Feldman, M.D., has been found guilty by the Louisiana State Board of
Medical Examiners of misconduct related to controlled substances.'' Id.
(citing 21 U.S.C. 823(f) and 824(a)(2); 21 CFR 1306.04).
As to the jurisdictional basis for the proceeding, the Show Cause
Order alleged that Respondent is ``registered . . . as a hospital/
clinic in [s]chedules II-V pursuant to [Registration No.] FF4394209 at
505 East Airport Drive, Baton Rouge, Louisiana.'' Id. at 2. The Order
alleged that this registration does not expire until ``September 30,
2019.'' Id.
As to the substantive grounds for the proceeding, the Show Cause
Order alleged that Respondent ``is without authority to dispense
controlled substances in Louisiana.'' Id. The Show Cause Order alleged
that while Respondent ``previously held'' a Louisiana controlled
substance license, ``[t]his license expired on September 23, 2016 and
has not been renewed.'' Id. The Order then asserted that ``based upon
[Respondent's] lack of [s]tate authority to dispense controlled
substances in . . . Louisiana,'' its registration must be revoked. Id.
As to the allegation based on its owner's misconduct, the Show
Cause Order alleged that ``[o]n August 15, 2016, the Louisiana State
Board of Medical Examiners found [Respondent's owner] guilty of
violating [state law] by giving his staff pre-signed controlled
substance prescriptions and/or allowing his staff to utilize a `Ghost
writer' to affix his signature to controlled substances
prescriptions.'' Id. The Order further alleged that its owner's conduct
violated 21 U.S.C. 841(a)(1) and 21 CFR 1306.04. Id.
The Show Cause Order notified Respondent of its right to request a
hearing on the allegations or to submit a written statement while
waiving its right to a hearing and the procedure for electing either
option. Id. (citing 21 CFR 1301.43). In addition, the Order notified
Respondent of its right to submit a corrective action plan pursuant to
21 U.S.C. 824(c)(2)(C). Id. at 3-4.
On June 15, 2017, Respondent, through its counsel, requested a
hearing on the allegations. Letter from Respondent to Hearing Clerk,
Office of Administrative Law Judges (June 15, 2017). The matter was
assigned to Administrative Law Judge Charles Wm. Dorman (hereinafter,
ALJ), who, on June 16, 2017, issued an order directing the Government
to file evidence supporting the allegations by June 29, 2017 at 2 p.m.,
as well any motion for summary disposition. Briefing Schedule For Lack
Of State Authority Allegations, at 1. The ALJ's order also provided
that if the Government moved for summary disposition, Respondent's
opposition was due by July 13, 2017 at 2 p.m. Id.
On June 20, 2017, the Government filed its Motion for Summary
Disposition. In its Motion, the Government argued that Respondent is a
``practitioner'' under the CSA and that because its ``state authority
has terminated, [it] no longer meets the statutory definition of a
practitioner'' and is not entitled to maintain its registration.
Motion, at 3. The Government thus sought a Recommendation that
Respondent's registration be revoked. Id.
As support for its motion, the Government provided: (1) A copy of
Respondent's registration; (2) a letter dated May 22, 2017 from the
Assistant Executive Director of the Louisiana Board of Pharmacy to a
DEA Diversion Investigator (DI) stating that Respondent's Louisiana
Controlled Dangerous Substance (CDS) license expired September 23,
2016; (3) a November 16, 2016 Order of the Louisiana Board of Pharmacy
indefinitely suspending the Controlled Dangerous Substance license of
Arnold E. Feldman based on the suspension of his Louisiana Medical
license; and (4) a declaration of the aforementioned DI that Respondent
``currently has no authority to handle controlled substances in
Louisiana.'' Mot. for Summ. Disp., Appendices A, B, and C. The
Government did not, however, seek summary disposition based on the
allegation that Respondent's owner had been found guilty by the
Louisiana Board of misconduct related to controlled substances. Compare
Mot. for Summ. Disp. with Show Cause Order, at 1-2.
Respondent did not file a Reply to the Government's Motion, and on
July 25, 2017, the ALJ granted the Government's Motion. Order Granting
Summary Disposition (R.D.), at 3, 6. Noting that the Government had
``provided a certified letter from the Louisiana Board of Pharmacy
indicating that the Respondent held Louisiana Board of Pharmacy Number
CDS.043803-ASC, but that this license expired on September 23, 2016,''
id. at 2, the ALJ found it ``undisputed that the Respondent lacks state
authorization to dispense controlled substances in Louisiana, where
[it] is registered.'' Id. at 5. Applying the Agency's longstanding rule
``that a practitioner must be currently authorized to dispense
controlled substances by the State in which [it] practices in order to
obtain and maintain a registration,'' id. at 4 (citation omitted), the
ALJ concluded that ``Respondent cannot maintain a DEA registration for
any location in'' Louisiana and recommended that I revoke its
registration.\1\ Id. at 5-6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ With respect to the allegation that Respondent's owner had
been found guilty of misconduct by the Louisiana Board of Medical
Examiners, the ALJ noted that [t]he Government did not provide any
argument or evidence in its Motion.'' R.D. 6 n.1. However, as the
ALJ observed, ``Respondent's lack of state authority to dispense
controlled substances is a sufficient independent ground to
recommend the revocation of [its] registration.'' Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 55643]]
Having considered the record, I adopt the ALJ's finding of fact
that Respondent's Louisiana CDS license has expired and his of
conclusion of law that Respondent lacks state authorization to dispense
controlled substances in Louisiana. I will therefore adopt the ALJ's
recommendation that I revoke Respondent's registration. I make the
following findings.
Findings of Fact
Respondent is the holder of DEA Certificate of Registration No.
FF4394209, pursuant to which it is authorized to dispense controlled
substances in schedules II through V as a Hospital/Clinic, at the
registered address of: First Choice Surgery Center of Baton Rouge,
L.L.C., 505 East Airport Drive, Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Mot. for Summ.
Disp., Appendix A. This registration does not expire until September
30, 2019. Id. Respondent is owned by Arnold E. Feldman, M.D. Resp.'s
Hrng. Req, at 1.
Respondent also previously held Louisiana Controlled Dangerous
Substance License No.043803-ASC. Id., at Appendix B. However,
Respondent allowed this license to expire on September 23, 2016. Id.
Accordingly, I find that Respondent currently lacks authority to
dispense controlled substances under the laws of the State of
Louisiana.
Discussion
Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3), the Attorney General is authorized
to suspend or revoke a registration issued under section 823 of the
Controlled Substances Act (CSA), ``upon a finding that the registrant .
. . has had [its] State license . . . suspended [or] revoked . . . by
competent State authority and is no longer authorized by State law to
engage in the . . . dispensing of controlled substances.'' With respect
to a practitioner, which includes a hospital or clinic, see 21 U.S.C.
802(21), DEA has long held that the possession of authority to dispense
controlled substances under the laws of the State in which a
practitioner engages in professional practice is a fundamental
condition for obtaining and maintaining a practitioner's registration.
See, e.g., James L. Hooper, 76 FR 71371 (2011), pet. for rev. denied,
481 Fed. Appx. 826 (4th Cir. 2012); Frederick Marsh Blanton, 43 FR
27616 (1978).
This rule derives from the text of two other provisions of the CSA,
section 802(21), which defines the term ``practitioner,'' and section
823(f), which sets forth the registration requirements for
practitioners. Notably, in section 802(21), Congress defined ``the term
`practitioner' [to] mean[ ] a . . . physician . . . hospital, 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) (emphasis added). The text of this
provision makes clear that a hospital is not a practitioner within the
meaning of the CSA if it is not ``licensed, registered or otherwise
permitted, by the jurisdiction in which [it] practices . . . to
dispense [or] administer . . . a controlled substance in the course of
professional practice.'' Id.
To the same effect, Congress, in setting the requirements for
obtaining a practitioner's registration, directed that ``[t]he Attorney
General shall register practitioners . . . if the applicant is
authorized to dispense . . . controlled substances under the laws of
the State in which [it] practices.'' 21 U.S.C. 823(f). Based on these
provisions, the Agency held nearly forty years ago that ``[s]tate
authorization to dispense or otherwise handle controlled substances is
a prerequisite to the issuance and maintenance of a Federal controlled
substances registration.'' Blanton, 43 FR at 27617 (revoking
physician's registration based on one-year suspension of his state
license) (emphasis added).
Having allowed its Louisiana CDS license to expire, Respondent is
no longer authorized to dispense controlled substances in the State.\2\
Because Congress has clearly mandated that a practitioner possess state
authority in order to be deemed a practitioner under the Act, and
Respondent is no longer authorized to dispense controlled substances
under the laws of Louisiana, the State in which it is registered, I
adopt the ALJ's recommended order and will order that its registration
be revoked. See, e.g., Hooper, 76 FR at 71371-72; Sheran Arden Yeates,
71 FR 39130, 39131 (2006); Dominick A. Ricci, 58 FR 51104, 51105
(1993); Bobby Watts, 53 FR 11919, 11920 (1988); Blanton, 43 FR at
27616.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Subsequent to the ALJ's issuance of his Recommended
Decision, Respondent has not filed a motion supported by any
evidence that its CDS license has been reinstated with either the
ALJ or my Office.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 No.
FF4394209 issued to First Choice Surgery Center of Baton Rouge, L.L.C.,
be, and it hereby is, revoked. This order is effective immediately.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ As found above, Respondent is owned by Dr. Arnold E.
Feldman. For the same reasons which led the former Acting
Administrator to revoke Dr. Feldman's Louisiana registration with an
immediate effective date, see Arnold E. Feldman, 82 FR 39614, 39618
& n.8 (2017), I conclude that the public interest necessitates that
this Order be effective immediately. 21 CFR 1316.67.
Dated: November 13, 2017.
Robert W. Patterson,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2017-25288 Filed 11-21-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
