Theodore S. Wright Jr., M.D.; Decision and Order, 79308-79309 [2024-22200]
Download as PDF
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
79308
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 188 / Friday, September 27, 2024 / Notices
industry in the United States exists as
required by subsection (a)(2) of section
337;
(2) Pursuant to section 210.10(b)(1) of
the Commission’s Rules of Practice and
Procedure, 19 CFR 210.10(b)(1), the
plain language description of the
accused products or category of accused
products, which defines the scope of the
investigation, is ‘‘televisions with smart
features and functionality’’;
(3) For the purpose of the
investigation so instituted, the following
are hereby named as parties upon which
this notice of investigation shall be
served:
(a) The complainant is: Maxell, Ltd.,
1. Koizumi, Oyamazaki, Oyamazaki-cho,
Otokuni-gun, Kyoto, 618–8525 Japan.
(b) The respondents are the following
entities alleged to be in violation of
section 337, and are the parties upon
which the complaint is to be served:
TCL Electronics Holdings Ltd. (f/k/a
TCL, Multimedia Technology
Holdings, Ltd.), 7th Floor, Building
22E, 22 Science Park East Avenue,
Hong Kong Science Park, Shatin, New
Territories, Hong Kong
TCL Industries Holdings Co., Ltd., 22nd
Floor, TCL Technical Tower, Huifeng
3 Road, Zhongkai Development, Zone
Huizhou, Guangdong, China, 516006
T.C.L. Industries Holdings (H.K.)
Limited, 8th Floor, Building 22E,
Phase Three, Hong Kong Science
Park, Pak Shek Kok, New Territories,
Hong Kong
TTE Technology, Inc. (d/b/a TCL North
America), 1860 Compton Avenue,
Corona, CA 92881
TTE Corporation, 7th Floor, Building
22E, 22 Science Park East Avenue,
Hong Kong Science Park, Shatin, New
Territories, Hong Kong
TCL King Electrical Appliances,
(Huizhou) Co. Ltd., No. 78, Huifeng 4
Road, Zhongkai Development Zone
Huizhou, China, 516006
Manufacturas Avanzadas S.A. de C.V.,
Blvd. Independecia No. 2151, Ciudad
Juarez, Chihuahua, 32580, Mexico
TCL Smart Device (Vietnam) Co., Ltd.,
No. 26 VSIP II–A, Street 32, Vietnam
Singapore Industrial Park II–A, Tan
Binh Commune, Bac Tan Uyen
District, Binh Duong Province, 75000,
Vietnam
Shenzhen TCL New Technology Co.,
Ltd., 9th Floor, TCL Electronics
Holdings Limited Building, TCL
International E City, No. 1001
Zhongshan Park Road, Nanshan,
China, 518067
TCL Optoelectronics Technology
(Huizhou) Co., Ltd., No. 78, Huifeng
4 Road, Zhongkai Development Zone
Huizhou, China, 516006
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:09 Sep 26, 2024
Jkt 262001
TCL Overseas Marketing Ltd., 5th Floor,
Building 22E, 22 Science Park East
Avenue, Hong Kong Science Park,
Shatin, New Territories, Hong Kong
TCL Technology Group Corporation, (f/
k/a TCL Corp.), TCL Technology
Building, No. 17, Huifeng Third Road,
Zhongkai High-Tech Development
Zone, Huizhou, Guangdong, China
516001
(c) The Office of Unfair Import
Investigations, U.S. International Trade
Commission, 500 E Street SW, Suite
401, Washington, DC 20436; and
(4) For the investigation so instituted,
the Chief Administrative Law Judge,
U.S. International Trade Commission,
shall designate the presiding
Administrative Law Judge.
Responses to the complaint and the
notice of investigation must be
submitted by the named respondents in
accordance with section 210.13 of the
Commission’s Rules of Practice and
Procedure, 19 CFR 210.13. Pursuant to
19 CFR 201.16(e) and 210.13(a), as
amended in 85 FR 15798 (March 19,
2020), such responses will be
considered by the Commission if
received not later than 20 days after the
date of service by the complainant of the
complaint and the notice of
investigation. Extensions of time for
submitting responses to the complaint
and the notice of investigation will not
be granted unless good cause therefor is
shown.
Failure of a respondent to file a timely
response to each allegation in the
complaint and in this notice may be
deemed to constitute a waiver of the
right to appear and contest the
allegations of the complaint and this
notice, and to authorize the
administrative law judge and the
Commission, without further notice to
the respondent, to find the facts to be as
alleged in the complaint and this notice
and to enter an initial determination
and a final determination containing
such findings, and may result in the
issuance of an exclusion order or a cease
and desist order or both directed against
the respondent.
By order of the Commission.
Issued: September 24, 2024.
Lisa Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2024–22187 Filed 9–26–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
PO 00000
Frm 00083
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Drug Enforcement Administration
Theodore S. Wright Jr., M.D.; Decision
and Order
On August 30, 2023, the Drug
Enforcement Administration (DEA or
Government) issued an Order to Show
Cause (OSC) to Theodore S. Wright Jr.,
M.D., of Chicago, Illinois (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. AW2016651, alleging 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 Illinois, the state in which [he
is] registered with DEA.’’ Id. at 1–2
(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
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 2.1 ‘‘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
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), 1301.46. RFAA, at 1; see also 21 CFR
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, effective
February 21, 2023, the Illinois
Department of Financial and
Professional Regulation suspended
1 Based on the Government’s submissions in its
RFAA dated October 17, 2023, the Agency finds
that service of the OSC on Registrant was adequate.
Specifically, the included declaration from a DEA
Diversion Investigator indicates that on August 31,
2023, Registrant was personally served with the
OSC at his registered address. RFAAX 2, at 1; see
also id. at 3 (Form DEA–12 signed by Registrant on
August 31, 2023).
E:\FR\FM\27SEN1.SGM
27SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 188 / Friday, September 27, 2024 / Notices
Registrant’s Illinois medical license.
RFAAX 1, at 1. According to Illinois’s
online records, of which the Agency
takes official notice, Registrant’s Illinois
medical license remains suspended.2
Illinois Department of Financial and
Professional Regulation License Search,
https://online-dfpr.micropact.com/
lookup/licenselookup.aspx/ (last visited
date of signature of this Order).
Accordingly, the Agency finds that
Registrant is not licensed to practice
medicine in Illinois, 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,
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
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 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
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:09 Sep 26, 2024
Jkt 262001
Pursuant to the Illinois Controlled
Substances Act, a practitioner in good
faith (‘‘the regular course of professional
treatment’’) may dispense a controlled
substance. 720 Ill. Comp. Stat. 570/
312(a), 570/102(u) (2024).4 A
‘‘practitioner’’ means ‘‘a physician
licensed to practice medicine in all its
branches . . . or other person licensed,
registered, or otherwise lawfully
permitted by the United States or
[Illinois] 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.’’ Id. 570/102(kk).
Here, the undisputed evidence in the
record is that Registrant currently lacks
authority to practice medicine in
Illinois. As discussed above, an
individual must be a licensed
practitioner to dispense a controlled
substance in Illinois. Thus, because
Registrant lacks authority to practice
medicine in Illinois, and, therefore, is
not authorized to handle controlled
substances in Illinois, 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. AW2016651 issued
to Theodore S. Wright Jr., 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 Theodore S. Wright Jr.,
M.D., to renew or modify this
registration, as well as any other
pending application of Theodore S.
Wright Jr., M.D., for additional
registration in Illinois. This Order is
effective October 28, 2024.
Signing Authority
This document of the Drug
Enforcement Administration was signed
on September 19, 2024, by
Administrator Anne Milgram. That
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.
4 ‘‘Dispense’’ means ‘‘to deliver a controlled
substance to an ultimate user or research subject by
or pursuant to the lawful order of a prescriber,
including the prescribing, administering, packaging,
labeling, or compounding necessary to prepare the
substance for that delivery.’’ Id. 570/102(p).
PO 00000
Frm 00084
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
79309
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. 2024–22200 Filed 9–26–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–09–P
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Drug Enforcement Administration
[Docket No. 24–46]
Wagner Gervais, P.A.; Decision and
Order
On May 7, 2024, the Drug
Enforcement Administration (DEA or
Government) issued an Order to Show
Cause (OSC) to Wagner Gervais, P.A., of
Tucson, Arizona (Respondent). OSC, at
1, 4. The OSC proposed the revocation
of Respondent’s DEA Certificate of
Registration No. MG7845778, alleging
that Respondent’s DEA registration
should be revoked because Respondent
is ‘‘without authority to prescribe,
administer, dispense, or otherwise
handle controlled substances in the
State of Arizona, the state in which [he
is] registered with DEA.’’ Id. at 2 (citing
21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3)).
On May 21, 2024, Respondent
requested a hearing and filed an
Answer. On June 4, 2024, the
Government filed a Motion for
Summary Disposition, to which
Respondent did not respond.1 On June
24, 2024, Administrative Law Judge
Teresa A. Wallbaum (the ALJ) granted
the Government’s Motion for Summary
Disposition and recommended the
revocation of Respondent’s registration,
finding that because Respondent lacks
state authority to handle controlled
substances in Arizona, the state in
which he is registered with DEA,
‘‘[t]here is no genuine issue of material
fact in this case.’’ Order Granting the
Government’s Motion for Summary
Disposition, and Recommended
1 On June 14, 2024, Respondent sought to
continue the DEA proceedings while appealing the
loss of his state authority; consistent with past
precedent, the Administrative Law Judge denied the
continuance.
E:\FR\FM\27SEN1.SGM
27SEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 188 (Friday, September 27, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 79308-79309]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-22200]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Drug Enforcement Administration
Theodore S. Wright Jr., M.D.; Decision and Order
On August 30, 2023, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA or
Government) issued an Order to Show Cause (OSC) to Theodore S. Wright
Jr., M.D., of Chicago, Illinois (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. AW2016651,
alleging 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
Illinois, the state in which [he is] registered with DEA.'' Id. at 1-2
(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 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 2.\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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Based on the Government's submissions in its RFAA dated
October 17, 2023, the Agency finds that service of the OSC on
Registrant was adequate. Specifically, the included declaration from
a DEA Diversion Investigator indicates that on August 31, 2023,
Registrant was personally served with the OSC at his registered
address. RFAAX 2, at 1; see also id. at 3 (Form DEA-12 signed by
Registrant on August 31, 2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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), 1301.46. RFAA, at 1; see
also 21 CFR 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,
effective February 21, 2023, the Illinois Department of Financial and
Professional Regulation suspended
[[Page 79309]]
Registrant's Illinois medical license. RFAAX 1, at 1. According to
Illinois's online records, of which the Agency takes official notice,
Registrant's Illinois medical license remains suspended.\2\ Illinois
Department of Financial and Professional Regulation License Search,
https://online-dfpr.micropact.com/lookup/licenselookup.aspx/ (last
visited date of signature of this Order). Accordingly, the Agency finds
that Registrant is not licensed to practice medicine in Illinois, 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 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, 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\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to the Illinois Controlled Substances Act, a practitioner
in good faith (``the regular course of professional treatment'') may
dispense a controlled substance. 720 Ill. Comp. Stat. 570/312(a), 570/
102(u) (2024).\4\ A ``practitioner'' means ``a physician licensed to
practice medicine in all its branches . . . or other person licensed,
registered, or otherwise lawfully permitted by the United States or
[Illinois] 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.'' Id.
570/102(kk).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ ``Dispense'' means ``to deliver a controlled substance to an
ultimate user or research subject by or pursuant to the lawful order
of a prescriber, including the prescribing, administering,
packaging, labeling, or compounding necessary to prepare the
substance for that delivery.'' Id. 570/102(p).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here, the undisputed evidence in the record is that Registrant
currently lacks authority to practice medicine in Illinois. As
discussed above, an individual must be a licensed practitioner to
dispense a controlled substance in Illinois. Thus, because Registrant
lacks authority to practice medicine in Illinois, and, therefore, is
not authorized to handle controlled substances in Illinois, 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.
AW2016651 issued to Theodore S. Wright Jr., 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 Theodore S. Wright Jr., M.D.,
to renew or modify this registration, as well as any other pending
application of Theodore S. Wright Jr., M.D., for additional
registration in Illinois. This Order is effective October 28, 2024.
Signing Authority
This document of the Drug Enforcement Administration was signed on
September 19, 2024, 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. 2024-22200 Filed 9-26-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-P