[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 93 (Friday, May 12, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 30614]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-11886]



[[Page 30614]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration

[Docket No. 99-24]


Robert P. Doughton, M.D.; Denial of Application

    On April 14, 1999, the Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of 
Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) issued an 
Order to Show Cause to Robert P. Doughton, M.D. (Respondent) of 
Portland, Oregon, notifying him of an opportunity to show cause as to 
why DEA should not deny his application for a DEA Certificate of 
Registration as a practitioner pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 823(f), for reason 
that his registration would be inconsistent with the public interest.
    DEA received a request for a hearing from Respondent on May 28, 
1999, and the matter was docketed before Administrative Law Judge Mary 
Ellen Bittner. Following prehearing procedures, a hearing commenced on 
November 3, 1999, in Portland, Oregon. Due to an emergency situation in 
the courtroom that occurred in the midst of the hearing, Judge Bittner 
indefinitely postponed the hearing.
    On November 10, 1999, the Government filed a Motion for Summary 
Disposition, alleging that Respondent is not currently authorized to 
handle controlled substances in Oregon, the state where he seeks 
registration with DEA. Judge Bittner gave Respondent an opportunity to 
file a response to the Government's motion, however no such response 
was filed.
    On December 22, 1999, Judge Bittner issued her Opinion and 
Recommended Decision finding that Respondent lacks authorization to 
handle controlled substances in the State of Oregon; granting the 
Government's Motion for Summary Disposition; and recommending that 
Respondent's application for a DEA Certificate of Registration be 
denied. Neither party filed exceptions to her Opinion and Recommended 
Decision, and on January 24, 2000, Judge Bittner 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 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.
    The Deputy Administrator finds that Respondent submitted an 
application for a DEA Certificate of Registration in Schedules IV and V 
at an address in Portland, Oregon. The Deputy Administrator further 
finds that the Oregon Board of Medical Examiners issued on Order on 
October 15, 1999, suspending Respondent's medical license. Respondent 
did not offer any evidence to dispute the suspension of his Oregon 
medical license. Therefore, the Deputy Administrator finds that 
Respondent is not currently authorized to practice medicine in the 
State of Oregon and as a result, it is reasonable to infer that 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 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).
    Respondent has not denied that he is not currently authorized 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 Bittner 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. It is well-settled that when no 
question of material fact is involved, aplenary, adversary 
administrative proceeding involving evidence and cross-examination of 
witnesses is not obligatory. See Gilbert Ross, M.D., 61 FR 8664 (1996); 
Philip E. Kird, M.D., 48 FR 32,887 (1983), aff'd sub nom Kird v. 
Mullen, 749 F.2d 297 (6th Cir. 1984); NLRB v. International Association 
of Bridge, Structural and Ornamental Ironworkers, AFL-CIO, 549 F.2d 634 
(9th Cir. 1977).
    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 the 
application for a DEA Certificate of Registration submitted by Robert 
P. Doughton, M.D., be, and it hereby is, denied. This order is 
effective June 12, 2000.

    Dated: May 4, 2000.
Donnie R. Marshall,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 00-11886 Filed 5-11-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-M