Peter John Ulbrich, M.D.; Decision and Order, 42013-42014 [2019-17621]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 159 / Friday, August 16, 2019 / Notices
notice was published in the Federal
Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the
Act on May 17, 2019 (84 FR 22520).
Suzanne Morris,
Chief, Premerger and Division Statistics Unit,
Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 2019–17601 Filed 8–15–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–11–P
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Drug Enforcement Administration
Peter John Ulbrich, M.D.; Decision and
Order
On March 4, 2019, the Assistant
Administrator, Diversion Control
Division, Drug Enforcement
Administration (hereinafter,
Government), issued an Order to Show
Cause to Peter John Ulbrich, M.D.,
(hereinafter, Registrant), of Peachtree
City, Georgia. Order to Show Cause
(hereinafter, OSC), at 1. The OSC
proposes the revocation of Registrant’s
Certificate of Registration No.
FU2662523 on the ground that
Registrant does ‘‘not have authority to
handle controlled substances in Georgia,
the state in which [Registrant is]
registered with the DEA.’’ Id. (citing 21
U.S.C. 823(f) and 824(a)(3)).
Specifically, the OSC alleges that the
Georgia Composite Medical Board
(hereinafter, Board) issued an Initial
Decision indefinitely suspending
Registrant’s medical license on February
9, 2018. Id. at 1.
The OSC notified Registrant of the
right to request a hearing on the
allegations or to submit a written
statement, while waiving the right to a
hearing, the procedures for electing each
option, and the consequences for failing
to elect either option. Id. at 2 (citing 21
CFR 1301.43). The OSC also notified
Registrant of the opportunity to submit
a corrective action plan. OSC, at 2–3
(citing 21 U.S.C. 824(c)(2)(C)).
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Adequacy of Service
In a Declaration dated June 24, 2019,
a Diversion Investigator (hereinafter, DI)
assigned to the Atlanta Division Office
stated that on May 7, 2019, he and
another DI met with Registrant at an
agreed location and he personally
served him with the OSC. Government’s
Request for Final Agency Action
(hereinafter, RFAA), GX 10 (Declaration
of the Diversion Investigator (hereinafter
DI’s Declaration)), at 2–3. Registrant
signed a DEA Form 12, Receipt for Cash
or Other Items, to acknowledge his
receipt of the Show Cause Order. Id. at
3; see also GX 6.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:10 Aug 15, 2019
Jkt 247001
42013
In its RFAA, the Government
represents that ‘‘more than [thirty] days
have passed since Registrant received
the [OSC]; however, Registrant has not
submitted to DEA a request for a hearing
. . . nor has he corresponded in writing
or otherwise’’ regarding a hearing.
RFAA at 2. The Government requests
the issuance of a revocation order on the
basis that ‘‘Registrant has waived his
opportunity for a hearing’’ and his
registration should be revoked pursuant
to 21 U.S.C. 802(21), 823(f) and
824(a)(3). Id. at 2.
Based on the DI’s Declaration, the
Government’s written representations,
and my review of the record, I find that
the Government accomplished service
of the OSC on Registrant on May 7,
2019. I also find that more than thirty
days have now passed since the
Government accomplished service of
the OSC. Further, based on the
Government’s written representations, I
find that neither Registrant, nor anyone
purporting to represent the Registrant,
requested a hearing, submitted a written
statement while waiving Registrant’s
right to a hearing, or submitted a
corrective action plan. Accordingly, I
find that Registrant has waived the right
to a hearing and the right to submit a
written statement and corrective action
plan. 21 CFR 1301.43(d) and 21 U.S.C.
824(c)(2)(C).
I, therefore, issue this Decision and
Order based on the record submitted by
the Government, which constitutes the
entire record before me. 21 CFR
1301.43(e).
GX 4 (Order), at 2. The Order provided
that after two years the ‘‘[Registrant]
may request his suspension be lifted
following treatment by a Boardapproved physician and advocacy from
a physician.’’ Id. The Order upheld an
Initial Decision (hereinafter, Initial
Decision) issued after a hearing by a
state administrative law judge
(hereinafter, ALJ) on February 9, 2018.
The ALJ’s Initial Decision found that,
based on unrebutted expert testimony,
‘‘[Registrant’s] history of sexual
misconduct, receipt of intensive
inpatient and outpatient treatment,
‘relapse’ behaviors, lack of transparency,
poor insight and judgment demonstrates
that, without further treatment, he
cannot practice with reasonable skill
and safety.’’ Id. at 18. Therefore, the ALJ
recommended Registrant’s ‘‘license to
practice medicine in the State of Georgia
be indefinitely suspended until
[Registrant] undergoes any treatment
ordered by the Board and it is
determined that he can practice with
reasonable skill and safety.’’ RFAA, GX
3 (Initial Decision), at 19.
According to the website of the
Georgia Composite Medical Board, of
which I take official notice, Registrant’s
license is still indefinitely suspended.
https://gcmb.mylicense.com/
verification/ (last visited August 5,
2019).1 The State of Georgia online
records show that Registrant’s medical
license remains suspended and that
Registrant is not authorized in the State
of Georgia to prescribe controlled
substances. Id.
Findings of Fact
Discussion
Registrant’s DEA Registration
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 (hereinafter, CSA),
‘‘upon a finding that the registrant . . .
has had his State license or registration
suspended . . . [or] revoked . . . by
competent State authority and is no
longer authorized by State law to engage
Registrant is the holder of DEA
Certificate of Registration No.
FU2662523 at the registered address of
Cosmedical, 401 Highway 74 North,
Peachtree City, Georgia 30269. RFAA,
GX 1 (Facsimile of Registrant’s DEA
Certificate of Registration); GX 2
(Certification of Registration Status).
Pursuant to this registration, Registrant
is authorized to dispense controlled
substances in schedules II through V as
a practitioner. Id. Registrant’s
registration expires on May 31, 2020,
and is ‘‘in an active pending status.’’ GX
2 (Certification of Registration Status) at
1.
The Status of Registrant’s State License
On May 17, 2018, the Georgia
Composite Medical Board (hereinafter,
Board) issued a Final Decision and
Order (hereinafter, Order) indefinitely
suspending [Registrant’s] license to
practice medicine in the State of
Georgia, effective on that date. RFAA,
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
1 Under the Administrative Procedure Act, an
agency ‘‘may take official notice of facts at any stage
in a proceeding—even in the final decision.’’
United States Department of Justice, Attorney
General’s Manual on the Administrative Procedure
Act 80 (1947) (Wm. W. Gaunt & Sons, Inc., Reprint
1979). Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 556(e), ‘‘[w]hen an
agency decision rests on official notice of a material
fact not appearing in the evidence in the record, a
party is entitled, on timely request, to an
opportunity to show the contrary.’’ Accordingly,
Registrant may dispute my finding by filing a
properly supported motion for reconsideration
within 15 calendar days of the date of this Order.
Any such motion shall be filed with the Office of
the Administrator and a copy shall be served on the
Government. In the event Registrant files a motion,
the Government shall have 15 calendar days to file
a response.
E:\FR\FM\16AUN1.SGM
16AUN1
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
42014
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 159 / Friday, August 16, 2019 / Notices
in the . . . dispensing of controlled
substances.’’ With respect to a
practitioner, the DEA has also 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, M.D., 76 FR 71,371
(2011), pet. for rev. denied, 481 Fed.
Appx. 826 (4th Cir. 2012); Frederick
Marsh Blanton, M.D., 43 FR 27,616,
27,617 (1978).
This rule derives from the text of two
provisions of the CSA. First, Congress
defined 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). Second, in setting the
requirements for obtaining a
practitioner’s registration, Congress
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 he practices.’’ 21
U.S.C. 823(f). Because Congress has
clearly mandated that a practitioner
possess State authority in order to be
deemed a practitioner under the CSA,
the DEA has held repeatedly that
revocation of a practitioner’s registration
is the appropriate sanction whenever he
is no longer authorized to dispense
controlled substances under the laws of
the State in which he practices. See,
e.g., Hooper, supra, 76 FR at 71,371–72;
Sheran Arden Yeates, M.D., 71 FR
39,130, 39,131 (2006); Dominick A.
Ricci, M.D., 58 FR 51,104, 51,105 (1993);
Bobby Watts, M.D., 53 FR 11,919, 11,920
(1988); Blanton, supra, 43 FR at 27,617.
The Georgia Controlled Substances
Act requires that ‘‘every person who
manufactures, distributes, or dispenses
any controlled substances within this
state or who proposes to engage in the
manufacture, distribution, or dispensing
of any controlled substance within this
state must obtain annually a registration
issued by the State Board of Pharmacy
in accordance with its rules.’’ Ga. Code
Ann. § 16–13–35(a) (West 1982). The
Act exempts from separate controlled
substance registration requirements,
‘‘persons licensed as a physician,
dentist, or veterinarian under the laws
of the state to use, mix, prepare,
dispense, prescribe, and administer
drugs in connection with medical
treatment to the extent provided by the
laws of this state.’’ Id. at 16–13–35(g)(2).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:10 Aug 15, 2019
Jkt 247001
According to the Medical Practice Act
of the State of Georgia, the definition of
a ‘‘physician’’ is a ‘‘person licensed to
practice medicine under this article,’’
and the definition of ‘‘to practice
medicine’’ is ‘‘to hold oneself out to the
public as being engaged in the diagnosis
or treatment of disease, defects, or
injuries of human beings; or the
suggestion, recommendation, or
prescribing of any form of treatment for
the intended palliation, relief, or cure of
any physical, mental, or functional
ailment or defect of any person.’’ Ga.
Code Ann. §§ 43–34–21(2), (3) (West
1981).
Here, the undisputed evidence in the
record is that Registrant currently lacks
authority to practice medicine in
Georgia. As already discussed, a person
must be registered to dispense a
controlled substance in Georgia, unless
he is licensed as a physician. Thus,
because Registrant is no longer a
licensed physician in Georgia and,
therefore, is no longer registered to or
authorized to dispense controlled
substances in Georgia, I will order that
Registrant’s DEA registration be
revoked.
Order
Pursuant to 28 CFR 0.100(b) and the
authority vested in me by 21 U.S.C.
824(a), I hereby revoke DEA Certificate
of Registration No. FU2662523 issued to
Peter John Ulbrich, M.D. This Order is
effective September 16, 2019.
Dated: August 2, 2019.
Uttam Dhillon,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2019–17621 Filed 8–15–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–09–P
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Drug Enforcement Administration
Brent E. Silvers, M.D.; Decision and
Order
On May 9, 2019, the Assistant
Administrator, Diversion Control
Division, Drug Enforcement
Administration (hereinafter, DEA or
Government), issued an Order to Show
Cause to Brent E. Silvers, M.D.
(hereinafter, Registrant) of Irvine,
California. Order to Show Cause
(hereinafter, OSC), at 1. The OSC
proposed the revocation of Registrant’s
Certificate of Registration No.
BS2811392 on the ground that
Registrant ‘‘is without authority to
handle controlled substances in the
State of California, the state in which
[Registrant is] registered with the DEA.’’
Id. at 1–2 (citing 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3)).
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Specifically, the OSC alleged that on
January 11, 2019, the Medical Board of
California (hereinafter, Board) issued a
Decision revoking Registrant’s
California medical license, effective
February 8, 2019. Id.
The OSC notified Registrant of the
right to request a hearing on the
allegations or to submit a written
statement while waiving the right to a
hearing, the procedures for electing each
option, and the consequences for failing
to elect either option. Id., at 2 (citing 21
CFR 1301.43). The OSC also notified
Registrant of the opportunity to submit
a corrective action plan. Id. at 2–3
(citing 21 U.S.C. 824(c)(2)(C)).
Adequacy of Service
In a Declaration dated June 19, 2019,
a Diversion Investigator (hereinafter, DI)
assigned to the Riverside District office,
Los Angeles Field Division, stated that
he and another DI traveled to
Registrant’s registered address located at
2 Hughes, Suite 150, Irvine, California
92618 on May 10, 2019. Request for
Final Agency Action dated July 10, 2019
(hereinafter, RFAA), Government
Exhibit (hereinafter, GX) GX 4 (DI’s
Declaration). The DI stated that upon
arrival at the registered address,
‘‘Registrant identified himself . . . as Dr.
Silvers’’ to the DIs. Id. The DI then
‘‘personally served the [OSC] on
Registrant by handing it to him.’’.
Registrant signed a DEA Form 12,
Receipt for Cash or Other Items, to
acknowledge his receipt of the Show
Cause Order. Id.; see also GX 4B.
In its RFAA, the Government
represents that ‘‘at least [thirty] days
have passed since the time the [OSC]
was served on Registrant’’ and he ‘‘has
not requested a hearing and has not
otherwise corresponded or
communicated with DEA.’’ RFAA, at 1.
The Government requests that
‘‘Registrant’s DEA Registration [ ] be
revoked based on 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3)
because Registrant has no valid medical
license in California . . . [and] is
without state authority to handle
controlled substances in California.’’ Id.
at 2–3.
Based on the DI’s Declaration, the
Government’s written representations,
and my review of the record, I find that
the Government accomplished service
of the OSC on Registrant on May 10,
2019. I also find that more than thirty
days have now passed since the
Government accomplished service of
the OSC. Further, based on the
Government’s written representations, I
find that neither Registrant, nor anyone
purporting to represent the Registrant,
requested a hearing, submitted a written
statement while waiving Registrant’s
E:\FR\FM\16AUN1.SGM
16AUN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 159 (Friday, August 16, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42013-42014]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-17621]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Drug Enforcement Administration
Peter John Ulbrich, M.D.; Decision and Order
On March 4, 2019, the Assistant Administrator, Diversion Control
Division, Drug Enforcement Administration (hereinafter, Government),
issued an Order to Show Cause to Peter John Ulbrich, M.D.,
(hereinafter, Registrant), of Peachtree City, Georgia. Order to Show
Cause (hereinafter, OSC), at 1. The OSC proposes the revocation of
Registrant's Certificate of Registration No. FU2662523 on the ground
that Registrant does ``not have authority to handle controlled
substances in Georgia, the state in which [Registrant is] registered
with the DEA.'' Id. (citing 21 U.S.C. 823(f) and 824(a)(3)).
Specifically, the OSC alleges that the Georgia Composite Medical
Board (hereinafter, Board) issued an Initial Decision indefinitely
suspending Registrant's medical license on February 9, 2018. Id. at 1.
The OSC notified Registrant of the right to request a hearing on
the allegations or to submit a written statement, while waiving the
right to a hearing, the procedures for electing each option, and the
consequences for failing to elect either option. Id. at 2 (citing 21
CFR 1301.43). The OSC also notified Registrant of the opportunity to
submit a corrective action plan. OSC, at 2-3 (citing 21 U.S.C.
824(c)(2)(C)).
Adequacy of Service
In a Declaration dated June 24, 2019, a Diversion Investigator
(hereinafter, DI) assigned to the Atlanta Division Office stated that
on May 7, 2019, he and another DI met with Registrant at an agreed
location and he personally served him with the OSC. Government's
Request for Final Agency Action (hereinafter, RFAA), GX 10 (Declaration
of the Diversion Investigator (hereinafter DI's Declaration)), at 2-3.
Registrant signed a DEA Form 12, Receipt for Cash or Other Items, to
acknowledge his receipt of the Show Cause Order. Id. at 3; see also GX
6.
In its RFAA, the Government represents that ``more than [thirty]
days have passed since Registrant received the [OSC]; however,
Registrant has not submitted to DEA a request for a hearing . . . nor
has he corresponded in writing or otherwise'' regarding a hearing. RFAA
at 2. The Government requests the issuance of a revocation order on the
basis that ``Registrant has waived his opportunity for a hearing'' and
his registration should be revoked pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 802(21),
823(f) and 824(a)(3). Id. at 2.
Based on the DI's Declaration, the Government's written
representations, and my review of the record, I find that the
Government accomplished service of the OSC on Registrant on May 7,
2019. I also find that more than thirty days have now passed since the
Government accomplished service of the OSC. Further, based on the
Government's written representations, I find that neither Registrant,
nor anyone purporting to represent the Registrant, requested a hearing,
submitted a written statement while waiving Registrant's right to a
hearing, or submitted a corrective action plan. Accordingly, I find
that Registrant has waived the right to a hearing and the right to
submit a written statement and corrective action plan. 21 CFR
1301.43(d) and 21 U.S.C. 824(c)(2)(C).
I, therefore, issue this Decision and Order based on the record
submitted by the Government, which constitutes the entire record before
me. 21 CFR 1301.43(e).
Findings of Fact
Registrant's DEA Registration
Registrant is the holder of DEA Certificate of Registration No.
FU2662523 at the registered address of Cosmedical, 401 Highway 74
North, Peachtree City, Georgia 30269. RFAA, GX 1 (Facsimile of
Registrant's DEA Certificate of Registration); GX 2 (Certification of
Registration Status). Pursuant to this registration, Registrant is
authorized to dispense controlled substances in schedules II through V
as a practitioner. Id. Registrant's registration expires on May 31,
2020, and is ``in an active pending status.'' GX 2 (Certification of
Registration Status) at 1.
The Status of Registrant's State License
On May 17, 2018, the Georgia Composite Medical Board (hereinafter,
Board) issued a Final Decision and Order (hereinafter, Order)
indefinitely suspending [Registrant's] license to practice medicine in
the State of Georgia, effective on that date. RFAA, GX 4 (Order), at 2.
The Order provided that after two years the ``[Registrant] may request
his suspension be lifted following treatment by a Board-approved
physician and advocacy from a physician.'' Id. The Order upheld an
Initial Decision (hereinafter, Initial Decision) issued after a hearing
by a state administrative law judge (hereinafter, ALJ) on February 9,
2018. The ALJ's Initial Decision found that, based on unrebutted expert
testimony, ``[Registrant's] history of sexual misconduct, receipt of
intensive inpatient and outpatient treatment, `relapse' behaviors, lack
of transparency, poor insight and judgment demonstrates that, without
further treatment, he cannot practice with reasonable skill and
safety.'' Id. at 18. Therefore, the ALJ recommended Registrant's
``license to practice medicine in the State of Georgia be indefinitely
suspended until [Registrant] undergoes any treatment ordered by the
Board and it is determined that he can practice with reasonable skill
and safety.'' RFAA, GX 3 (Initial Decision), at 19.
According to the website of the Georgia Composite Medical Board, of
which I take official notice, Registrant's license is still
indefinitely suspended. https://gcmb.mylicense.com/verification/ (last
visited August 5, 2019).\1\ The State of Georgia online records show
that Registrant's medical license remains suspended and that Registrant
is not authorized in the State of Georgia to prescribe controlled
substances. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Under the Administrative Procedure Act, an agency ``may take
official notice of facts at any stage in a proceeding--even in the
final decision.'' United States Department of Justice, Attorney
General's Manual on the Administrative Procedure Act 80 (1947) (Wm.
W. Gaunt & Sons, Inc., Reprint 1979). Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 556(e),
``[w]hen an agency decision rests on official notice of a material
fact not appearing in the evidence in the record, a party is
entitled, on timely request, to an opportunity to show the
contrary.'' Accordingly, Registrant may dispute my finding by filing
a properly supported motion for reconsideration within 15 calendar
days of the date of this Order. Any such motion shall be filed with
the Office of the Administrator and a copy shall be served on the
Government. In the event Registrant files a motion, the Government
shall have 15 calendar days to file a response.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 (hereinafter, CSA), ``upon a finding that the
registrant . . . has had his State license or registration suspended .
. . [or] revoked . . . by competent State authority and is no longer
authorized by State law to engage
[[Page 42014]]
in the . . . dispensing of controlled substances.'' With respect to a
practitioner, the DEA has also 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, M.D., 76 FR 71,371 (2011),
pet. for rev. denied, 481 Fed. Appx. 826 (4th Cir. 2012); Frederick
Marsh Blanton, M.D., 43 FR 27,616, 27,617 (1978).
This rule derives from the text of two provisions of the CSA.
First, Congress defined 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). Second, in
setting the requirements for obtaining a practitioner's registration,
Congress 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 he
practices.'' 21 U.S.C. 823(f). Because Congress has clearly mandated
that a practitioner possess State authority in order to be deemed a
practitioner under the CSA, the DEA has held repeatedly that revocation
of a practitioner's registration is the appropriate sanction whenever
he is no longer authorized to dispense controlled substances under the
laws of the State in which he practices. See, e.g., Hooper, supra, 76
FR at 71,371-72; Sheran Arden Yeates, M.D., 71 FR 39,130, 39,131
(2006); Dominick A. Ricci, M.D., 58 FR 51,104, 51,105 (1993); Bobby
Watts, M.D., 53 FR 11,919, 11,920 (1988); Blanton, supra, 43 FR at
27,617.
The Georgia Controlled Substances Act requires that ``every person
who manufactures, distributes, or dispenses any controlled substances
within this state or who proposes to engage in the manufacture,
distribution, or dispensing of any controlled substance within this
state must obtain annually a registration issued by the State Board of
Pharmacy in accordance with its rules.'' Ga. Code Ann. Sec. 16-13-
35(a) (West 1982). The Act exempts from separate controlled substance
registration requirements, ``persons licensed as a physician, dentist,
or veterinarian under the laws of the state to use, mix, prepare,
dispense, prescribe, and administer drugs in connection with medical
treatment to the extent provided by the laws of this state.'' Id. at
16-13-35(g)(2).
According to the Medical Practice Act of the State of Georgia, the
definition of a ``physician'' is a ``person licensed to practice
medicine under this article,'' and the definition of ``to practice
medicine'' is ``to hold oneself out to the public as being engaged in
the diagnosis or treatment of disease, defects, or injuries of human
beings; or the suggestion, recommendation, or prescribing of any form
of treatment for the intended palliation, relief, or cure of any
physical, mental, or functional ailment or defect of any person.'' Ga.
Code Ann. Sec. Sec. 43-34-21(2), (3) (West 1981).
Here, the undisputed evidence in the record is that Registrant
currently lacks authority to practice medicine in Georgia. As already
discussed, a person must be registered to dispense a controlled
substance in Georgia, unless he is licensed as a physician. Thus,
because Registrant is no longer a licensed physician in Georgia and,
therefore, is no longer registered to or authorized to dispense
controlled substances in Georgia, I will order that Registrant's DEA
registration be revoked.
Order
Pursuant to 28 CFR 0.100(b) and the authority vested in me by 21
U.S.C. 824(a), I hereby revoke DEA Certificate of Registration No.
FU2662523 issued to Peter John Ulbrich, M.D. This Order is effective
September 16, 2019.
Dated: August 2, 2019.
Uttam Dhillon,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2019-17621 Filed 8-15-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-P