Siamak Arassi, M.D.; Decision and Order, 74521-74522 [2023-23958]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 209 / Tuesday, October 31, 2023 / Notices
the Agency finds that Registrant is not
licensed to engage in the practice of
medicine in New York, 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 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
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 71371 (2011), pet. for rev.
denied, 481 F. App’x 826 (4th Cir.
2012); Frederick Marsh Blanton, M.D.,
43 FR 27616, 27617 (1978).5
According to the New York
Controlled Substances Act (hereinafter,
the Act), ‘‘[i]t shall be unlawful for any
person to manufacture, sell, prescribe,
distribute, dispense, administer,
possess, have under his control,
abandon, or transport a controlled
substance except as expressly allowed
by this article.’’ N.Y. Pub. Health Law
section 3304 (McKinney 2023). Further,
the Act defines a ‘‘practitioner’’ as ‘‘[a]
physician . . . or other person licensed,
or otherwise permitted to dispense,
administer or conduct research with
5 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.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Oct 30, 2023
Jkt 262001
respect to a controlled substance in the
course of a licensed professional
practice. . . .’’ Id. at section 3302(27).
Finally, New York regulations state that
‘‘[a] prescription for a controlled
substance may be issued only by a
practitioner who is . . . authorized to
prescribe controlled substances
pursuant to his licensed professional
practice. . . .’’ N.Y. Comp. Codes R. &
Regs. tit. 10, section 80.64(a)(1) (2023).
Here, the undisputed evidence in the
record is that Registrant lacks authority
to practice medicine in New York. As
discussed above, a physician must be a
licensed practitioner to dispense a
controlled substance in New York.
Thus, because Registrant lacks authority
to practice medicine in New York and,
therefore, is not authorized to handle
controlled substances in New York,
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. BS8311502 issued to
Dmitry Anatolevich Shelchkov, 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 Dmitry
Anatolevich Shelchkov, M.D., to renew
or modify this registration, as well as
any other pending application of Dmitry
Anatolevich Shelchkov, M.D., for
additional registration in New York.
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. 2023–23950 Filed 10–30–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–09–P
PO 00000
Frm 00121
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
74521
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Drug Enforcement Administration
Siamak Arassi, M.D.; Decision and
Order
On May 24, 2023, the Drug
Enforcement Administration (DEA or
Government) issued an Order to Show
Cause (OSC) to Siamak Arassi, M.D.
(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. BA8851809 at the registered address
of 19115 W Capitol Dr., Suite 117,
Brookfield, Wisconsin 53045. Id. at 1.
The OSC alleged that Registrant’s
registration should be revoked because
Registrant is ‘‘currently without
authority to handle controlled
substances in the State of Wisconsin,’’
the state in which he is registered with
DEA. Id. at 2 (citing 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3)).
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
be in default. OSC, at 2 (citing 21 CFR
1301.43). Here, Registrant did not
request a hearing. RFAA, at 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 February 15,
2023, the State of Wisconsin Medical
1 On June 1, 2023, a DEA Diversion Investigator
(DI) emailed Registrant at his personal email
address, attaching a copy of the OSC with a delivery
and read receipt request. RFAAX 2, at 2. DI received
notification that the email was delivered
successfully. Id. Registrant responded on the same
day by email but did not request a hearing. RFAAX
2, Attachment E. Based on the information in the
record, the Agency finds that the Government’s
service of the OSC on Registrant was adequate.
RFAA, at 2 (citing Emilio Luna, M.D., 77 FR 4829,
4830 (2012) (finding service via email can satisfy
due process)).
E:\FR\FM\31OCN1.SGM
31OCN1
74522
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 209 / Tuesday, October 31, 2023 / Notices
Examining Board issued a Final
Decision and Order indefinitely
suspending Registrant’s license to
practice medicine and surgery. RFAAX
1, at 2; RFAAX 2, Attachment C, at 15.
According to Wisconsin’s online
records, of which the Agency takes
official notice, Registrant’s Wisconsin
medical license remains suspended.2
Wisconsin Department of Safety and
Professional Services, Wisconsin
Credential/License Search, https://
licensesearch.wi.gov/ (last visited date
of signature of this Order). Therefore,
the Agency finds that Registrant is not
authorized to practice medicine nor to
handle controlled substances in
Wisconsin, 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 . . .
[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
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.
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Oct 30, 2023
Jkt 262001
According to Wisconsin statute,
‘‘dispense’’ means ‘‘to deliver a
controlled substance to an ultimate user
or research subject by or pursuant to the
lawful order of a practitioner, including
the prescribing, administering,
packaging, labeling or compounding
necessary to prepare the substance for
that delivery.’’ Wis. Stat. section
961.01(7) (2023). Further, a
‘‘practitioner’’ means a ‘‘physician . . .
or other person licensed, registered,
certified or otherwise permitted to
distribute, dispense, conduct research
with respect to, administer or use in
teaching or chemical analysis a
controlled substance in the course of
professional practice or research in
[Wisconsin].’’ Id. section 961.01(19)(a).
Here, the undisputed evidence in the
record is that Registrant currently lacks
authority to practice medicine in
Wisconsin. As already discussed, a
practitioner must be a licensed
practitioner to dispense controlled
substances in Wisconsin. Thus, because
Registrant lacks a license to practice
medicine in Wisconsin and, therefore, is
not authorized to handle controlled
substances in Wisconsin, 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. BA8851809 issued to
Siamak Arassi, 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 Siamak Arassi, M.D., to renew or
modify this registration, as well as any
other pending application of Siamak
Arassi, M.D., for additional registration
in Wisconsin. This Order is effective
November 30, 2023.
Signing Authority
This document of the Drug
Enforcement Administration was signed
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 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 27617.
PO 00000
Frm 00122
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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. 2023–23958 Filed 10–30–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–09–P
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Drug Enforcement Administration
Demille W. Madoux, M.D.; Decision and
Order
On January 11, 2023, the Drug
Enforcement Administration (DEA or
Government) issued an Order to Show
Cause (OSC) to Demille W. Madoux,
M.D. (Registrant). Request for Final
Agency Action (RFAA), Exhibit
(RFAAX) 2, at 1, 4. The OSC proposed
the revocation of Registrant’s Certificate
of Registration No. BM0663523 at the
registered address of 13921 N Meridian
Ave., Suite 100, Oklahoma City,
Oklahoma 73134. Id. at 1. The OSC
alleged that Registrant’s registration
should be revoked because Registrant is
‘‘currently without authority to handle
controlled substances in the State of
Oklahoma, the state in which [he is]
registered with DEA.’’ Id. at 2 (citing,
inter alia, 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3)).
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
be in default. Id. at 2–3 (citing 21 CFR
1301.43). Here, Registrant did not
request a hearing. RFAA, at 1.1 ‘‘A
default, unless excused, shall be
deemed to constitute a waiver of the
[registrant’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
1 Based on the Government’s submissions in its
RFAA dated April 25, 2023, the Agency finds that
service of the OSC on Registrant was adequate.
Specifically, the included copy of the certified mail
return receipt indicates that on March 11, 2023,
Registrant was personally served with the OSC at
his personal address. RFAAX 1, at 8.
E:\FR\FM\31OCN1.SGM
31OCN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 209 (Tuesday, October 31, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 74521-74522]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-23958]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Drug Enforcement Administration
Siamak Arassi, M.D.; Decision and Order
On May 24, 2023, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA or
Government) issued an Order to Show Cause (OSC) to Siamak Arassi, M.D.
(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. BA8851809 at the registered address of 19115 W Capitol
Dr., Suite 117, Brookfield, Wisconsin 53045. Id. at 1. The OSC alleged
that Registrant's registration should be revoked because Registrant is
``currently without authority to handle controlled substances in the
State of Wisconsin,'' the state in which he is registered with DEA. Id.
at 2 (citing 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3)).
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 be in default. OSC, at 2 (citing 21 CFR 1301.43).
Here, Registrant did not request a hearing. RFAA, at 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ On June 1, 2023, a DEA Diversion Investigator (DI) emailed
Registrant at his personal email address, attaching a copy of the
OSC with a delivery and read receipt request. RFAAX 2, at 2. DI
received notification that the email was delivered successfully. Id.
Registrant responded on the same day by email but did not request a
hearing. RFAAX 2, Attachment E. Based on the information in the
record, the Agency finds that the Government's service of the OSC on
Registrant was adequate. RFAA, at 2 (citing Emilio Luna, M.D., 77 FR
4829, 4830 (2012) (finding service via email can satisfy due
process)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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] Sec. 1316.67.'' Id. Sec. 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. Sec. 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
February 15, 2023, the State of Wisconsin Medical
[[Page 74522]]
Examining Board issued a Final Decision and Order indefinitely
suspending Registrant's license to practice medicine and surgery. RFAAX
1, at 2; RFAAX 2, Attachment C, at 15.
According to Wisconsin's online records, of which the Agency takes
official notice, Registrant's Wisconsin medical license remains
suspended.\2\ Wisconsin Department of Safety and Professional Services,
Wisconsin Credential/License Search, https://licensesearch.wi.gov/
(last visited date of signature of this Order). Therefore, the Agency
finds that Registrant is not authorized to practice medicine nor to
handle controlled substances in Wisconsin, the state in which he is
registered with DEA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\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 [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 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\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\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). 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 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 27617.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to Wisconsin statute, ``dispense'' means ``to deliver a
controlled substance to an ultimate user or research subject by or
pursuant to the lawful order of a practitioner, including the
prescribing, administering, packaging, labeling or compounding
necessary to prepare the substance for that delivery.'' Wis. Stat.
section 961.01(7) (2023). Further, a ``practitioner'' means a
``physician . . . or other person licensed, registered, certified or
otherwise permitted to distribute, dispense, conduct research with
respect to, administer or use in teaching or chemical analysis a
controlled substance in the course of professional practice or research
in [Wisconsin].'' Id. section 961.01(19)(a).
Here, the undisputed evidence in the record is that Registrant
currently lacks authority to practice medicine in Wisconsin. As already
discussed, a practitioner must be a licensed practitioner to dispense
controlled substances in Wisconsin. Thus, because Registrant lacks a
license to practice medicine in Wisconsin and, therefore, is not
authorized to handle controlled substances in Wisconsin, 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.
BA8851809 issued to Siamak Arassi, 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 Siamak Arassi, M.D., to renew
or modify this registration, as well as any other pending application
of Siamak Arassi, M.D., for additional registration in Wisconsin. 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. 2023-23958 Filed 10-30-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
