[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 119 (Tuesday, June 22, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33318-33319]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-15748]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration
[Docket No. 98-7]


Michael J. Pine, D.D.S.; Denial of Application

    On October 22, 1997, the Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of 
Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) issued an 
Order to Show Cause to Michael J. Pine, D.D.S. (Respondent) of 
Roseburg, Oregon, notifying him of an opportunity to show cause as to 
why DEA should not deny his application for registration as a 
practitioner under 21 U.S.C. 823(f) and 824(a)(1) and (a)(4) for reason 
that his registration would be inconsistent with the public interest.
    Respondent filed a request for a hearing, and the matter was 
docketed before Administrative Law Judge Gail A. Randall. Following 
prehearing procedures, a hearing was held on April 2, 1998, in Eugene, 
Oregon. After the hearing, both parties submitted proposed findings of 
fact, conclusions of law and argument.
    On November 27, 1998, while the matter was still pending before 
Judge Randall, counsel for the Government filed a Motion to Reopen 
Record and for Summary Disposition, alleging that Respondent is 
currently without authority to handle controlled substances in the 
State of Oregon. The motion was supported by a copy of the Consent 
Order for Revocation of License entered into by Respondent with the 
Oregon Board of Dentistry dated June 26, 1998. The Government argued 
that DEA cannot issue Respondent a registration since Respondent is 
without state authorization to handle controlled substances. Although 
Respondent was given the opportunity to file a response to the 
Government's motion, no such response was filed.
    Thereafter, on December 29, 1998, Judge Randall issued her Opinion 
and Recommended Decision, finding that based upon the evidence before 
her, Respondent lacks authorization to handle controlled substances in 
the State of Oregon and therefore he is not entitled to a DEA 
registration in that state; granting the Government's Motion for 
Summary Disposition; and recommending that Respondent's application for 
registration be denied. Neither party filed exceptions to her opinion, 
and on February 5, 1999, Judge Randall transmitted the record of these 
proceedings to the Deputy Administrator.
    The Deputy Administrator has considered the record in its entirety, 
and pursuant to 21 CFR 1416.67, 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 by a Consent Order for 
Revocation of License dated June 26, 1998, the Oregon Board of 
Dentistry ordered the immediate revocation of Respondent's license to 
practice dentistry. Therefore, the Deputy Administrator finds that 
Respondent is not currently authorized to practice dentistry in Oregon, 
the state where he has applied to be registered with DEA. The Deputy 
Administrator further finds that it is reasonable to infer that since 
Respondent is not authorized to practice dentistry in Oregon, he is 
also not authorized to handle controlled substances in that state.
    DEA does not have the statutory authority under the Controlled 
Substances Act to issue or maintain a registration if the applicant or 
registrant is without state authority to handle controlled substances 
in the state in which he conducts his business. See 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 licensed to handle 
controlled substances in Oregon. Since Respondent lacks this state 
authority, he is not entitled to a DEA registration in that state.
    In light of the above, Judge Randall properly granted the 
Government's Motion for Summary Disposition. The parties did not 
dispute the fact that Respondent is currently unauthorized to handle 
controlled substances in Oregon. See Dong Ha Chung, M.D., 63 FR 11,694 
(1998); Jesus R. Juarez, M.D., 62 FR 14,945 (1997).
    Since DEA does not have the statutory authority to issue Respondent 
a DEA registration because he is not currently authorized to handle 
controlled substances in Oregon, the Deputy Administrator concludes 
that it is unnecessary to determine whether Respondent's application 
for registration should be denied based upon the grounds alleged in the 
Order to Show Cause.
    Accordingly, the Deputy Administrator of the Drug Enforcement 
Administration pursuant to the authority vested in him by 21 U.S.C. 823

[[Page 33319]]

and 824 and 28 CFR 0.100(b) and 0.104, hereby orders that the 
application for registration submitted by Michael J. Pine, D.D.S. on 
June 5, 1995, be, and it hereby is, denied. This order is effective 
June 22, 1999.

    Dated: June 14, 1999.
Donnie R. Marshall,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 99-15748 Filed 6-21-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-M