[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 58 (Friday, March 26, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Page 14769]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-7441]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Drug Enforcement Administration
[Docket No. 98-36]
Francois J. Saculla, M.D., Revocation of Registration
On April 13, 1998, the Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of
Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), issued an
Order to Show Cause to Francois J. Saculla, M.D. (Respondent) of
Racine, Wisconsin notifying him of an opportunity to show cause as to
why DEA should not revoke his DEA Certificate of Registration
BS1404552, and deny any pending applications for renewal of his
registration pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 823(f) and 824(a)(3), for reason
that he is not currently authorized to handle controlled substances in
the State of Wisconsin.
By letter dated May 21, 1998, but not filed with the Office of
Administrative Law Judges until July 20, 1998, Respondent requested a
hearing, and the matter was docketed before Administrative Law Judge
Mary Ellen Bittner. On August 20, 1998, the Government filed a Motion
for Summary Disposition alleging that Respondent is not currently
authorized to handle controlled substances in the state in which he is
registered with DEA and therefore DEA cannot maintain his registration.
Judge Bittner provided Respondent with an opportunity to respond to the
Government's motion, but no such response was filed.
On October 14, 1998, Judge Bittner issued her Opinion and
Recommended Decision finding that Respondent lacked authorization to
handle controlled substances in Wisconsin; granting the Government's
Motion for Summary Disposition; and recommending that Respondent's DEA
Certificate of Registration be revoked. Neither party filed exceptions
to her opinion, and on November 24, 1998, Judge Bittner transmitted the
record of these proceedings to the then-Acting Deputy Administrator.
The Deputy Administrator has considered the record in its entirely,
and pursuant to 21 CFR 1316.67, hereby issues his final order based
upon findings of fact and conclusions of law as hereinafter set forth.
The Deputy Administrator adopts, in full, the Opinion and Recommended
Decision of the Administrative Law Judge. His adoption is in no manner
diminished by any recitation of facts, issues and conclusions herein,
or of any failure to mention a matter of fact or law.
The Deputy Administrator finds that in a Final Decision and Order
dated November 25, 1994, the State of Wisconsin, Medical Examining
Board (Board) limited Respondent's license to practice medicine. The
Board Order prohibited Respondent from treating any female patient;
ordered that his entire practice be under the direct supervision of
another physician; required that Respondent undergo psychological
evaluation within 90 days; and advised that any additional limitations
recommended by the psychologist would be adopted by the Board. In
addition, costs were assessed against Respondent ion the amount of
$22,000. The Order placed no limitations on Respondent's ability to
handle controlled substances in Wisconsin. Therefore, Respondent
presently possesses a limited license to practice medicine in
Wisconsin.
However, in order to practice medicine in Wisconsin an individual
must not only be licensed but must also possess a registration.
Respondent's Wisconsin registration expired on November 1, 1995.
Therefore, Respondent is unable to practice medicine in the State of
Wisconsin. The Deputy Administrator finds that it is reasonable to
infer that if Respondent is unable to practice medicine in Wisconsin,
he is also not authorized to handle controlled substances in that
state. In his request for a hearing, Respondent did not deny that he
was not currently authorized to handle controlled substances in
Washington.
The DEA does not have statutory authority under the Controlled
Substances Act to issue or maintain a registration if the applicant or
registrant is without authority to handle controlled substances in the
state in which he conducts his business. 21 U.S.C. 802(21), 823(f) and
824(a)(3). This prerequisite has been consistently upheld. See Romeo J.
Perez, M.D., 62 FR 16,193 (1997); Demetris A. Green, M.D. 61 FR 60,728
(1996); Dominick A. Ricci, M.D., 58 FR 51,104 (1993).
Here it is clear that Respondent is not currently authorized to
handle controlled substances in Wisconsin, where he is registered with
DEA. Since Respondent lacks this state authority, he is not entitled to
a DEA registration in that state.
In light of the above, Judge Bittner properly granted the
Government's Motion for Summary Disposition. It is well settled that
where there is no material question of fact involved, or when the
material facts are agreed upon, there is no need for a plenary,
administrative hearing. Congress did not intend for administrative
agencies to perform meaningless tasks. Gilbert Ross, M.D., 61 FR 8664
(1996); Philip E. Kirk, M.D., 48 FR 32,887 (1993), aff'd sub nom Kirk
v. Mullen, 749 F.2d 297 (6th Cir. 1984).
Accordingly, the Deputy Administrator of the Drug Enforcement
Administration, pursuant to the authority vested in him by 21 U.S.C.
823 and 824 and 28 CFR 0.100(b) and 0.104, hereby orders that DEA
Certificate of Registration BS1404552, previously issued to Francois J.
Saculla, M.D., be, and it hereby is, revoked. The Deputy Administrator
further orders that any pending applications for renewal of such
registration, be, and they hereby are, denied. This order is effective
April 26, 1999.
Dated: March 22, 1999.
Donnie R. Marshall,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 99-7441 Filed 3-25-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-M