Fares F. Yasin, M.D.; Decision and Order, 74523-74525 [2023-23957]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 209 / Tuesday, October 31, 2023 / Notices
default . . . DEA may then file a request
for final agency action with the
Administrator, along with a record to
support its request. In such
circumstances, the Administrator may
enter a default final order pursuant to
[21 CFR] § 1316.67.’’ Id. § 1301.43(f)(1).
Here, the Government has requested
final agency action based on Registrant’s
default pursuant to 21 CFR 1301.43(c)
and (f). RFAA, at 1.
Findings of Fact
The Agency finds that, in light of
Registrant’s default, the factual
allegations in the OSC are admitted.
According to the OSC, on April 8, 2022,
Registrant ‘‘entered into an Agreement
with the State of Oklahoma Board of
Medical Licensure and Supervision ‘not
to practice in any manner as a Medical
Doctor in the State of Oklahoma,’ ’’ and
‘‘[o]n October 31, 2022, [Registrant’s]
State of Oklahoma controlled substance
registration expired.’’ RFAAX 2, at 2.
According to Oklahoma’s online
records, of which the Agency takes
official notice, Registrant is not
‘‘Registered to Dispense,’’ and
Registrant’s Oklahoma controlled
substance license remains inactive.2
Oklahoma Board of Medical Licensure
and Supervision, Search Licenses,
https://www.okmedicalboard.org/search
(last visited date of signature of this
Order); Oklahoma Bureau of Narcotics
and Dangerous Drugs Control, Registrant
Search, https://obnddc.us.
thentiacloud.net/webs/obnddc/register/
# (last visited date of signature of this
Order). Therefore, the Agency finds that
Registrant is not authorized to dispense
or handle controlled substances in
Oklahoma, the state in which he is
registered with DEA.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Discussion
Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3), the
Attorney General is authorized to
suspend or revoke a registration issued
under 21 U.S.C. 823 ‘‘upon a finding
that the registrant . . . has had his State
license or registration suspended . . .
2 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 the Agency’s finding by
filing a properly supported motion for
reconsideration of findings of fact within fifteen
calendar days of the date of this Order. Any such
motion and response shall be filed and served by
email to the other party and to the DEA Office of
the Administrator, Drug Enforcement
Administration at dea.addo.attorneys@dea.gov.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Oct 30, 2023
Jkt 262001
[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, 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, D.O., 76 FR 71371,
71372 (2011), pet. for rev. denied, 481
F. App’x 826 (4th Cir. 2012); Frederick
Marsh Blanton, D.O., 43 FR 27616,
27617 (1978).3
Pursuant to the Oklahoma’s Uniform
Controlled Dangerous Substances Act,
‘‘[e]very person who manufactures,
distributes, dispenses, prescribes,
administers or uses for scientific
purposes any controlled dangerous
substance within or into this state . . .
shall obtain a registration issued by the
Director of the Oklahoma State Bureau
of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs
Control, in accordance with rules
promulgated by the Director.’’ Okla.
Stat. tit. 63, section 2–302(A).4
Here, the evidence in the record is
that Registrant currently lacks authority
to handle controlled substances in
Oklahoma because his Oklahoma
controlled substance license has
expired. As already discussed, a person
must hold a valid controlled substance
license to dispense a controlled
substance in Oklahoma, subject to
limited exceptions. Thus, because
3 This rule derives from the text of two provisions
of the Controlled Substances Act. 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(g)(1). Because Congress has clearly mandated
that a practitioner possess state authority in order
to be deemed a practitioner under the CSA, 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., James L.
Hooper, 76 FR at 71371–72; Sheran Arden Yeates,
D.O., 71 FR 39130, 39131 (2006); Dominick A. Ricci,
D.O., 58 FR 51104, 51105 (1993); Bobby Watts, D.O.,
53 FR 11919, 11920 (1988); Frederick Marsh
Blanton, 43 FR at 27617.
4 Although there are limited circumstances under
which a person ‘‘may lawfully possess controlled
dangerous substances’’ without a registration issued
by the Director of the Oklahoma State Bureau of
Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs Control, based on
the information furnished by the Government, none
are applicable here. Id. Section 2–302(H).
PO 00000
Frm 00123
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
74523
Registrant lacks authority to handle
controlled substances in Oklahoma,
Registrant is not eligible to maintain a
DEA registration. Accordingly, the
Agency 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. BM0663523 issued
to Demille W. Madoux, M.D. Further,
pursuant to 28 CFR 0.100(b) and the
authority vested in me by 21 U.S.C.
823(g)(1), I hereby deny any pending
applications of Demille W. Madoux,
M.D., to renew or modify this
registration, as well as any other
pending application of Demille W.
Madoux, M.D., for additional
registration in Oklahoma. This Order is
effective November 30, 2023.
Signing Authority
This document of the Drug
Enforcement Administration was signed
on October 20, 2023, by Administrator
Anne Milgram. That document with the
original signature and date is
maintained by DEA. For administrative
purposes only, and in compliance with
requirements of the Office of the Federal
Register, the undersigned DEA Federal
Register Liaison Officer has been
authorized to sign and submit the
document in electronic format for
publication, as an official document of
DEA. This administrative process in no
way alters the legal effect of this
document upon publication in the
Federal Register.
Heather Achbach,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, Drug
Enforcement Administration.
[FR Doc. 2023–23953 Filed 10–30–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–09–P
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Drug Enforcement Administration
Fares F. Yasin, M.D.; Decision and
Order
On June 30, 2021, the Drug
Enforcement Administration
(hereinafter, DEA or Government)
issued an Order to Show Cause
(hereinafter, OSC) to Fares F. Yasin,
M.D. (hereinafter, Applicant). Request
for Final Agency Action (hereinafter,
RFAA), Exhibit (hereinafter, RFAAX) 2,
at 1, 4; RFAAX 4, at 1. The OSC
proposed the denial of Applicant’s
application for a DEA Certificate of
Registration, Control No. W19137777C,
with the proposed registered address of
E:\FR\FM\31OCN1.SGM
31OCN1
74524
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 209 / Tuesday, October 31, 2023 / Notices
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
11 Calle Central, Coto Laurel, Puerto
Rico 00780. RFAAX 2, at 1. The OSC
alleged that Applicant’s application
should be denied because Applicant
materially falsified his application and
because Applicant’s registration would
be inconsistent with the public interest.
Id. (citing 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(1),
823(g)(1) 1).
By letter dated August 31, 2021,
Applicant requested that DEA
‘‘[f]ormally withdraw [his] DEA
registration application and cancel the
hearing.’’ RFAAX 3.2 On May 25, 2023,
the Government submitted its RFAA,
alleging that Applicant’s Puerto Rico
controlled substance license had been
suspended and proposing the denial of
Applicant’s application on the grounds
that Applicant lacks authority to handle
controlled substances in Puerto Rico,
the territory in which he seeks
registration with DEA. RFAA, at 1, 3.3
The Government had not alleged that
Applicant lacked authority in the OSC.
See RFAAX 2. Nonetheless, the
Government is not required to issue an
amended OSC to notice an allegation of
a registrant’s lack of state (or in this case
territory) authority that arises during the
pendency of a proceeding regarding a
DEA registration. Hatem M. Ataya, M.D.,
81 FR 8221, 8244 (2016). Previous
Agency decisions have stated that
because the possession of state authority
is a prerequisite for obtaining and
maintaining a registration, the issue of
state authority can be raised at any stage
of a proceeding. See Ataya, 81 FR at
8244; Joe M. Morgan, D.O., 78 FR 61961,
61973–74 (2013).4
1 Effective December 2, 2022, the Medical
Marijuana and Cannabidiol Research Expansion
Act, Public Law 117–215, 136 Stat. 2257 (2022)
(Marijuana Research Amendments or MRA),
amended the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) and
other statutes. Relevant to this matter, the MRA
redesignated 21 U.S.C. 823(f), cited in the OSC, as
21 U.S.C. 823(g)(1). This Decision cites to the
current designation, 21 U.S.C. 823(g)(1), and to the
MRA-amended CSA throughout.
2 Based on the Declaration of a DEA Special
Agent, the Agency finds that the Government’s
service of the OSC on Applicant was adequate and
that Applicant was served with the OSC on July 8,
2021. RFAAX 4, at 1; see also RFAAX 4, Appendix
A. According to Applicant, he responded to the
OSC by email on August 8, 2021, and
communicated several times thereafter with DEA
regarding his desire to withdraw his application
prior to submitting the August 31, 2021 letter.
RFAAX 3.
3 In its RFAA, the Government appears to have
dropped the allegations regarding material
falsification and public interest. RFAA, at 2–3.
4 Even so, in such cases, a registrant must be
provided with a meaningful opportunity to contest
the allegation. See, e.g., Lawrence E. Stewart, M.D.,
86 FR 15257, 15257 (2021); Cypress Creek
Pharmacy LLC, 86 FR 71927, 71927 (2021); Lesly
Pompy, M.D., 84 FR 57749, 57749–50 (2019); Ataya,
81 FR at 8245; Morgan, 78 FR at 61973–74. On July
27, 2023, the Government submitted a Notice of
Notification of RFAA in which the Government
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Oct 30, 2023
Jkt 262001
The Agency makes the following
findings of fact based on the
uncontroverted evidence submitted by
the Government in its RFAA.
Findings of Fact
On August 10, 2022, the Puerto Rico
Department of Health suspended
Applicant’s Puerto Rico controlled
substance license. RFAAX 5, Appendix
A, at 1. As of August 15, 2022,
Applicant’s Puerto Rico controlled
substance license remained suspended.
Id.5 Accordingly, the Agency finds that
Applicant is not licensed to handle
controlled substances in Puerto Rico,
the territory in which he seeks
registration with DEA.
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 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
in the . . . dispensing of controlled
substances.’’ With respect to a
practitioner, 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
asserted that it had notified Applicant of the lack
of authority allegation and had provided Applicant
with a copy of the RFAA via email. Notice of
Notification of RFAA, at 1; see also Notice of
Notification of RFAA, Exhibit 1. The Government’s
evidence included an email to Applicant with
instructions for submitting a response, if desired, to
the lack of authority allegation. Id. Accordingly, the
Agency finds that Applicant was notified of the
RFAA and was provided with a meaningful
opportunity to contest the lack of authority
allegation. Further, more than two months have
passed since the Government notified Applicant
and Applicant has not availed himself of the
opportunity to respond.
5 The Agency has no indication that the status of
Applicant’s controlled substance license (which is
not publicly available information) has changed.
Following the submission of the Government’s
RFAA and its notification to Applicant that it had
submitted the RFAA, the Agency to date has not
received any correspondence from Applicant
regarding any changes to the status of his controlled
substance license. Accordingly, the Agency finds
that Applicant’s Puerto Rico controlled substance
license remains suspended as of the date of
signature of this Order. See Heather M. Entrekin,
DVM, 88 FR 17266, 17266 (2023). Applicant may
dispute the Agency’s finding by filing a motion for
reconsideration of findings of fact within fifteen
calendar days of the date of this Order with
supporting documentation (showing that Applicant
was able to dispense controlled substances on or
before the date of this Order). Any such motion and
response shall be filed and served by email to the
other party and to the DEA Office of the
Administrator, Drug Enforcement Administration,
at dea.addo.attorneys@dea.gov.
PO 00000
Frm 00124
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
and maintaining a practitioner’s
registration. See, e.g., James L. Hooper,
M.D., 76 FR 71,371 (2011), pet. for rev.
denied, 481 F. App’x 826 (4th Cir.
2012); Frederick Marsh Blanton, M.D.,
43 FR 27616, 27617 (1978).6
According to the Puerto Rico
Controlled Substances Act, ‘‘[a]ny
person who manufactures, distributes
and dispenses controlled substances in
the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico . . .
shall obtain a registration certification
annually, issued by the Secretary of
Health, pursuant to the rules and
regulations approved and promulgated
by said government official.’’ P.R. Laws
Ann. tit. 24, section 2302(a) (West,
current through all acts translated by the
Translation Office of the Puerto Rico
Government through the 2011
Legislative Session and various acts
from 2012 to the present). Further,
‘‘dispense’’ means ‘‘the prescribing,
administering or delivering of a
controlled substance to an ultimate user,
by prescription or order for
administering it. It includes the process
of the compounding, labeling and
packaging of a controlled substance for
such delivery. The term ‘dispenser’
means the practitioner who so delivers
a controlled substance.’’ Id. at section
2102(11).
Here, the undisputed evidence in the
record is that Applicant lacks authority
to dispense controlled substances in
Puerto Rico. As discussed above, a
physician must hold a controlled
substances license to dispense a
controlled substance in Puerto Rico.
Thus, because Applicant lacks authority
to handle controlled substances in
Puerto Rico, Applicant is not eligible to
receive a DEA registration. Accordingly,
6 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(g)(1) (this section,
formerly section 823(f), was redesignated as part of
the Medical Marijuana and Cannabidiol Research
Expansion Act, Public Law 117–215, 136 Stat. 2257
(2022)). Because Congress has clearly mandated that
a practitioner possess state authority in order to be
deemed a practitioner under the CSA, 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., James L. Hooper, 76 FR at
71371–72; Sheran Arden Yeates, M.D., 71 FR
39130, 39131 (2006); Dominick A. Ricci, M.D., 58
FR 51104, 51105 (1993); Bobby Watts, M.D., 53 FR
11919, 11920 (1988); Frederick Marsh Blanton, 43
FR at 27,617.
E:\FR\FM\31OCN1.SGM
31OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 209 / Tuesday, October 31, 2023 / Notices
the Agency will order that Applicant’s
application for a DEA registration be
denied.
Order
Pursuant to 28 CFR 0.100(b) and the
authority vested in me by 21 U.S.C.
823(g)(1), I hereby deny the pending
application for a Certificate of
Registration, Control Number
W19137777C, submitted by Fares F.
Yasin, M.D., as well as any other
pending application of Fares F. Yasin,
M.D., for additional registration in
Puerto Rico. This Order is effective
November 30, 2023.
Signing Authority
This document of the Drug
Enforcement Administration was signed
on October 20, 2023, by Administrator
Anne Milgram. That document with the
original signature and date is
maintained by DEA. For administrative
purposes only, and in compliance with
requirements of the Office of the Federal
Register, the undersigned DEA Federal
Register Liaison Officer has been
authorized to sign and submit the
document in electronic format for
publication, as an official document of
DEA. This administrative process in no
way alters the legal effect of this
document upon publication in the
Federal Register.
Heather Achbach,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, Drug
Enforcement Administration.
[FR Doc. 2023–23957 Filed 10–30–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–09–P
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Drug Enforcement Administration
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Stephen E. Van Noy, P.A.; Decision
and Order
On March 24, 2023, the Drug
Enforcement Administration (DEA or
Government) issued an Order to Show
Cause (OSC) to Stephen E. Van Noy,
P.A. (Registrant). Request for Final
Agency Action (RFAA), Exhibit
(RFAAX) 1, at 1, 3. The OSC proposed
the revocation of Registrant’s Certificate
of Registration No. MV2612681 at the
registered address of 2101 Box Butte
Avenue, Alliance, Nebraska 69301. Id.
at 1. The OSC alleged that Registrant’s
registration should be revoked because
Registrant is ‘‘currently without
authority to prescribe, administer,
dispense, or otherwise handle
controlled substances in the state of
Nebraska, the state in which [he is]
registered with DEA.’’ Id. at 1–2 (citing
21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3)).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Oct 30, 2023
Jkt 262001
The OSC notified Registrant of his
right to file with DEA a written request
for hearing, and that if he failed to file
such a request, he would be deemed to
have waived his right to a hearing and
be in default. Id. at 2 (citing 21 CFR
1301.43). Here, Registrant did not
request a hearing. RFAA, at 1, 2.1 ‘‘A
default, unless excused, shall be
deemed to constitute a waiver of the
registrant’s/applicant’s right to a hearing
and an admission of the factual
allegations of the [OSC].’’ 21 CFR
1301.43(e).
Further, ‘‘[i]n the event that a
registrant . . . is deemed to be in
default . . . DEA may then file a request
for final agency action with the
Administrator, along with a record to
support its request. In such
circumstances, the Administrator may
enter a default final order pursuant to
[21 CFR] § 1316.67.’’ Id. § 1301.43(f)(1).
Here, the Government has requested
final agency action based on Registrant’s
default pursuant to 21 CFR 1301.43(c),
(f). See also id. § 1316.67.
Findings of Fact
The Agency finds that, in light of
Registrant’s default, the factual
allegations in the OSC are admitted.
According to the OSC, on October 1,
2022, the Nebraska Department of
Health and Human Services revoked
Registrant’s Nebraska physician
assistant license. RFAAX 1, at 1.
According to Nebraska’s online
records, of which the Agency takes
official notice, Registrant’s Nebraska
physician assistant license remains
revoked.2 Nebraska Department of
Health and Human Services License
Information System Search, https://
www.nebraska.gov/LISSearch/search.cgi
(last visited date of signature of this
1 Based on the Government’s submissions in its
RFAA dated August 2, 2023, the Agency finds that
service of the OSC on Registrant was adequate.
Specifically, the included Declaration of a DEA
Diversion Investigator asserts that on March 30,
2023, Registrant was served with the OSC at his
registered address via certified mail. RFAAX 2, at
1.
2 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 the Agency’s finding by
filing a properly supported motion for
reconsideration of findings of fact within fifteen
calendar days of the date of this Order. Any such
motion and response shall be filed and served by
email to the other party and to DEA Office of the
Administrator, Drug Enforcement Administration at
dea.addo.attorneys@dea.gov.
PO 00000
Frm 00125
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
74525
Order). Accordingly, the Agency finds
that Registrant is not licensed to
practice as a physician assistant in
Nebraska, the state in which he is
registered with DEA.
Discussion
Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3), the
Attorney General is authorized to
suspend or revoke a registration issued
under 21 U.S.C. 823 ‘‘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 in the . . .
dispensing of controlled substances.’’
With respect to a practitioner, 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, D.O., 76 FR 71371
(2011), pet. for rev. denied, 481 F. App’x
826 (4th Cir. 2012); Frederick Marsh
Blanton, D.O., 43 FR 27616, 27617
(1978).3
According to Nebraska statute,
‘‘[d]ispense means to deliver a
controlled substance to an ultimate user
or a research subject pursuant to a
medical order issued by a practitioner
authorized to prescribe, including the
packaging, labeling, or compounding
necessary to prepare the controlled
substance for such delivery.’’ Neb. Rev.
Stat. section 28–401(8) (2023). Further,
a ‘‘[p]ractitioner means a physician, a
physician assistant . . . or any other
person licensed, registered, or otherwise
3 This rule derives from the text of two provisions
of the Controlled Substances Act (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(g)(1) (this section,
formerly section 823(f), was redesignated as part of
the Medical Marijuana and Cannabidiol Research
Expansion Act, Public Law 117–215, 136 Stat. 2257
(2022)). Because Congress has clearly mandated that
a practitioner possess state authority in order to be
deemed a practitioner under the CSA, 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., James L. Hooper, 76 FR at
71371–72; Sheran Arden Yeates, D.O., 71 FR 39130,
39131 (2006); Dominick A. Ricci, D.O., 58 FR 51104,
51105 (1993); Bobby Watts, D.O., 53 FR 11919,
11920 (1988); Frederick Marsh Blanton, 43 FR at
27617.
E:\FR\FM\31OCN1.SGM
31OCN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 209 (Tuesday, October 31, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 74523-74525]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-23957]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Drug Enforcement Administration
Fares F. Yasin, M.D.; Decision and Order
On June 30, 2021, the Drug Enforcement Administration (hereinafter,
DEA or Government) issued an Order to Show Cause (hereinafter, OSC) to
Fares F. Yasin, M.D. (hereinafter, Applicant). Request for Final Agency
Action (hereinafter, RFAA), Exhibit (hereinafter, RFAAX) 2, at 1, 4;
RFAAX 4, at 1. The OSC proposed the denial of Applicant's application
for a DEA Certificate of Registration, Control No. W19137777C, with the
proposed registered address of
[[Page 74524]]
11 Calle Central, Coto Laurel, Puerto Rico 00780. RFAAX 2, at 1. The
OSC alleged that Applicant's application should be denied because
Applicant materially falsified his application and because Applicant's
registration would be inconsistent with the public interest. Id.
(citing 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(1), 823(g)(1) \1\).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Effective December 2, 2022, the Medical Marijuana and
Cannabidiol Research Expansion Act, Public Law 117-215, 136 Stat.
2257 (2022) (Marijuana Research Amendments or MRA), amended the
Controlled Substances Act (CSA) and other statutes. Relevant to this
matter, the MRA redesignated 21 U.S.C. 823(f), cited in the OSC, as
21 U.S.C. 823(g)(1). This Decision cites to the current designation,
21 U.S.C. 823(g)(1), and to the MRA-amended CSA throughout.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
By letter dated August 31, 2021, Applicant requested that DEA
``[f]ormally withdraw [his] DEA registration application and cancel the
hearing.'' RFAAX 3.\2\ On May 25, 2023, the Government submitted its
RFAA, alleging that Applicant's Puerto Rico controlled substance
license had been suspended and proposing the denial of Applicant's
application on the grounds that Applicant lacks authority to handle
controlled substances in Puerto Rico, the territory in which he seeks
registration with DEA. RFAA, at 1, 3.\3\ The Government had not alleged
that Applicant lacked authority in the OSC. See RFAAX 2. Nonetheless,
the Government is not required to issue an amended OSC to notice an
allegation of a registrant's lack of state (or in this case territory)
authority that arises during the pendency of a proceeding regarding a
DEA registration. Hatem M. Ataya, M.D., 81 FR 8221, 8244 (2016).
Previous Agency decisions have stated that because the possession of
state authority is a prerequisite for obtaining and maintaining a
registration, the issue of state authority can be raised at any stage
of a proceeding. See Ataya, 81 FR at 8244; Joe M. Morgan, D.O., 78 FR
61961, 61973-74 (2013).\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Based on the Declaration of a DEA Special Agent, the Agency
finds that the Government's service of the OSC on Applicant was
adequate and that Applicant was served with the OSC on July 8, 2021.
RFAAX 4, at 1; see also RFAAX 4, Appendix A. According to Applicant,
he responded to the OSC by email on August 8, 2021, and communicated
several times thereafter with DEA regarding his desire to withdraw
his application prior to submitting the August 31, 2021 letter.
RFAAX 3.
\3\ In its RFAA, the Government appears to have dropped the
allegations regarding material falsification and public interest.
RFAA, at 2-3.
\4\ Even so, in such cases, a registrant must be provided with a
meaningful opportunity to contest the allegation. See, e.g.,
Lawrence E. Stewart, M.D., 86 FR 15257, 15257 (2021); Cypress Creek
Pharmacy LLC, 86 FR 71927, 71927 (2021); Lesly Pompy, M.D., 84 FR
57749, 57749-50 (2019); Ataya, 81 FR at 8245; Morgan, 78 FR at
61973-74. On July 27, 2023, the Government submitted a Notice of
Notification of RFAA in which the Government asserted that it had
notified Applicant of the lack of authority allegation and had
provided Applicant with a copy of the RFAA via email. Notice of
Notification of RFAA, at 1; see also Notice of Notification of RFAA,
Exhibit 1. The Government's evidence included an email to Applicant
with instructions for submitting a response, if desired, to the lack
of authority allegation. Id. Accordingly, the Agency finds that
Applicant was notified of the RFAA and was provided with a
meaningful opportunity to contest the lack of authority allegation.
Further, more than two months have passed since the Government
notified Applicant and Applicant has not availed himself of the
opportunity to respond.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Agency makes the following findings of fact based on the
uncontroverted evidence submitted by the Government in its RFAA.
Findings of Fact
On August 10, 2022, the Puerto Rico Department of Health suspended
Applicant's Puerto Rico controlled substance license. RFAAX 5, Appendix
A, at 1. As of August 15, 2022, Applicant's Puerto Rico controlled
substance license remained suspended. Id.\5\ Accordingly, the Agency
finds that Applicant is not licensed to handle controlled substances in
Puerto Rico, the territory in which he seeks registration with DEA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ The Agency has no indication that the status of Applicant's
controlled substance license (which is not publicly available
information) has changed. Following the submission of the
Government's RFAA and its notification to Applicant that it had
submitted the RFAA, the Agency to date has not received any
correspondence from Applicant regarding any changes to the status of
his controlled substance license. Accordingly, the Agency finds that
Applicant's Puerto Rico controlled substance license remains
suspended as of the date of signature of this Order. See Heather M.
Entrekin, DVM, 88 FR 17266, 17266 (2023). Applicant may dispute the
Agency's finding by filing a motion for reconsideration of findings
of fact within fifteen calendar days of the date of this Order with
supporting documentation (showing that Applicant was able to
dispense controlled substances on or before the date of this Order).
Any such motion and response shall be filed and served by email to
the other party and to the DEA Office of the Administrator, Drug
Enforcement Administration, at [email protected].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 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 in the . .
. dispensing of controlled substances.'' With respect to a
practitioner, 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 F. App'x 826 (4th Cir. 2012); Frederick Marsh Blanton,
M.D., 43 FR 27616, 27617 (1978).\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ 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(g)(1) (this
section, formerly section 823(f), was redesignated as part of the
Medical Marijuana and Cannabidiol Research Expansion Act, Public Law
117-215, 136 Stat. 2257 (2022)). Because Congress has clearly
mandated that a practitioner possess state authority in order to be
deemed a practitioner under the CSA, 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., James L. Hooper, 76 FR at 71371-72; Sheran Arden Yeates, M.D.,
71 FR 39130, 39131 (2006); Dominick A. Ricci, M.D., 58 FR 51104,
51105 (1993); Bobby Watts, M.D., 53 FR 11919, 11920 (1988);
Frederick Marsh Blanton, 43 FR at 27,617.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to the Puerto Rico Controlled Substances Act, ``[a]ny
person who manufactures, distributes and dispenses controlled
substances in the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico . . . shall obtain a
registration certification annually, issued by the Secretary of Health,
pursuant to the rules and regulations approved and promulgated by said
government official.'' P.R. Laws Ann. tit. 24, section 2302(a) (West,
current through all acts translated by the Translation Office of the
Puerto Rico Government through the 2011 Legislative Session and various
acts from 2012 to the present). Further, ``dispense'' means ``the
prescribing, administering or delivering of a controlled substance to
an ultimate user, by prescription or order for administering it. It
includes the process of the compounding, labeling and packaging of a
controlled substance for such delivery. The term `dispenser' means the
practitioner who so delivers a controlled substance.'' Id. at section
2102(11).
Here, the undisputed evidence in the record is that Applicant lacks
authority to dispense controlled substances in Puerto Rico. As
discussed above, a physician must hold a controlled substances license
to dispense a controlled substance in Puerto Rico. Thus, because
Applicant lacks authority to handle controlled substances in Puerto
Rico, Applicant is not eligible to receive a DEA registration.
Accordingly,
[[Page 74525]]
the Agency will order that Applicant's application for a DEA
registration be denied.
Order
Pursuant to 28 CFR 0.100(b) and the authority vested in me by 21
U.S.C. 823(g)(1), I hereby deny the pending application for a
Certificate of Registration, Control Number W19137777C, submitted by
Fares F. Yasin, M.D., as well as any other pending application of Fares
F. Yasin, M.D., for additional registration in Puerto Rico. This Order
is effective November 30, 2023.
Signing Authority
This document of the Drug Enforcement Administration was signed on
October 20, 2023, by Administrator Anne Milgram. That document with the
original signature and date is maintained by DEA. For administrative
purposes only, and in compliance with requirements of the Office of the
Federal Register, the undersigned DEA Federal Register Liaison Officer
has been authorized to sign and submit the document in electronic
format for publication, as an official document of DEA. This
administrative process in no way alters the legal effect of this
document upon publication in the Federal Register.
Heather Achbach,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, Drug Enforcement Administration.
[FR Doc. 2023-23957 Filed 10-30-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
