[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 202 (Thursday, October 18, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52945-52946]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-26180]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration


John Arthur Thomassen, D.D.S.; Revocation of Registration

    The Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, 
Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), issued an Order to Show Cause 
(OTSC), dated February 6, 2001, by certified mail to John Arthur 
Thomassen, D.D.S., (Respondent) notifying him of an opportunity to show 
cause as to why the DEA should not revoke his DEA Certificate of 
Registration BT0666000, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3), and deny any 
pending applications for renewal of this registration, pursuant to 21 
U.S.C. 823(f), for the reason that Respondent's license to practice 
medicine in the jurisdiction in which Respondent practices, California, 
was revoked.
    By letter filed March 9, 2001, Respondent, through counsel, 
requested a hearing in this matter.
    On March 12, 2001, administrative Law Judge Gail A. Randall issued 
an Order for Prehearing Statements. On March 15, 2001, the Government 
filed a motion seeking summary disposition, arguing that Respondent's 
license to practice medicine, and therefore, to handle controlled 
substances in the jurisdiction of his registration, was revoked.
    The Government attached to its motion a copy of the Proposed 
Decision, rendered by Administrative Law Judge Hoover, In the Matter of 
the Supplemental Accusation and Petition to Revoke Probation Against 
John Arthur Thomassen, D.D.S., case number 01-97-1208, dated March 22, 
2000. Judge Hoover proposed revocation of the Respondent's probation 
and state license. The Government also attached the Decision of the 
Dental Board of California, Department of Consumer Affairs, State of 
California (Board), In the Matter of the Supplemental Accusation and 
Petition to Revoke Probation Against John Arthur Thomassen, D.D.S., 
case number 01-97-1208, dated April 3, 2000. The Board adapted the 
Administrative Law Judge's decision as its own, to take effect on May 
3, 2000.
    In light of these attachments, the Government argues that 
Respondent does not have a valid license to practice dentistry or to 
handle controlled substances in the jurisdiction indicated on his DEA 
Certificate of Registration.
    By an Order dated March 16, 2000, Judge Randall inter alia stayed 
the proceedings pending the resolution of the Government's motion, and 
she allowed the Respondent until April 6, 2001, to respond to the 
Government's motion. No response has been received from Respondent as 
of this date.
    The 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 
Administrator adopts in full the Opinion and Recommended Decision of 
the Administrative Law Judge.

[[Page 52946]]

    The DEA does not have the statutory authority pursuant to the 
Controlled Substances Act to issue or to maintain a registration if the 
applicant or registrant is without state authority to handle controlled 
substances in the state in which he or she practices. See 21 U.S.C. 
802(21), 823(f), and 824(a)(3). This prerequisite has been consistently 
upheld in prior DEA cases. See Graham Travers Schuler, M.D., 65 FR 
50570 (2000); Romeo J. Perez, M.D., 62 FR 16,193 (1997); Demetris A. 
Green, M.D., 61 FR 60728 (1996); Dominick A. Ricci, M.D., 58 FR 51104 
(1993).
    In the instant case, the Administrator finds the Government has 
presented evidence demonstrating that the Respondent is not authorized 
to practice dentistry in California, and therefore, the Administrator 
infers that Respondent is also not authorized to handle controlled 
substances in California, where he conducts his business, according to 
the address listed on his DEA Certificate of Registration. The 
Administrator finds that Judge Randall allowed Respondent ample time to 
refute the Government's evidence, and that Respondent has submitted no 
evidence or assertions to the contrary. Thus, there is no genuine issue 
of material fact concerning Respondent's lack of authorization to 
practice dentistry in California or to handle controlled substances in 
that State.
    The Administrator concurs with Judge Randall's finding that it is 
well settled that when there is no question of material fact involved, 
there is no need for a plenary, administrative hearing. Congress did 
not intend for administrative agencies to perform meaningless tasks. 
See Michael G. Dolin, M.D., 65 FR 5661 (2000); Jesus R. Juarez, M.D., 
62 FR 14945 (1997); see also Philip E. Kirk, M.D., 48 FR 32887 (1983), 
aff'd sub nom. Kirk v. Mullen, 749 F.2d 297 (6th Cir. 1984).
    Accordingly, the 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 BT0666000, issued to John Arthur Thomassen, 
D.D.S., be, and it hereby is, revoked; and that any pending 
applications for the renewal or modifications of said Certificate be 
denied. This order is effective November 19, k2001.

    Dated: October 10, 2001.
Asa Hutchinson,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 01-26180 Filed 10-17-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-M