[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 97 (Monday, May 20, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35587-35588]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-12487]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration


David H. Mills, D.V.M.; Revocation of Registration

    On July 6, 2001, the Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of 
Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), issued an 
Order to Show Cause (OTSC) by certified mail to David H. Mills, D.V.M., 
(Respondent) notifying him of an opportunity to show cause as to why 
the DEA should not revoke his DEA Certificate of Registration 
BM4863812, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3), and deny any pending 
applications for renewal or modification of this registration, pursuant 
to 21 U.S.C. 823(f), for the reasons that Respondent's state medical 
license has been suspended, and Respondent is not currently authorized 
to practice veterinary medicine or to handle controlled substances in 
Wisconsin, the state in which he is registered.
    By letter dated August 10, 2001, Respondent requested a hearing in 
this matter. On September 14, 2001, the Government filed a Request for 
Stay of Proceedings and Motion for Summary Disposition (Government's 
Motion). By Order dated September 20, 2001, Administration Law Judge 
Gail A. Randall (Judge Randall) granted Respondent until October 4, 
2001 to respond to the Government's Motion. Subsequently, by Order 
dated November 28, 2001, Respondent was granted until December 5, 2001, 
to respond to the Government's Motion. The Order was sent certified 
mail, return receipt requested. Yet while Judge Randall's office 
received a signed and dated receipt indicating this Order was received 
December 3, 2001, Respondent failed to file a response to the 
Government's Motion.
    The Government attached to its Motion a copy of the Final Decision 
and Order of the State of Wisconsin (Order), Veterinary Examining Board 
(Board), dated February 1, 2001, revoking Respondent's license to 
practice veterinary medicine. The Government also attached to its 
Motion a declaration of the custodian of records for the Board, 
verifying that, as of February 1, 2001, Respondent's veterinary license 
had been revoked.
    On January 8, 2002, Judge Randall issued her Recommended Rulings, 
Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Decision of the 
Administrative Law Judge (Recommended Ruling), wherein she granted the 
Government's Motion and recommended that Respondent's DEA registration 
be revoked. The record

[[Page 35588]]

of these proceedings was subsequently transmitted to the Deputy 
Administrator for final decision February 12, 2002.
    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 Recommended Ruling of the 
Administrative Law Judge.
    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 
50,570 (2000); 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).
    In the instant case, the Deputy Administrator finds the Government 
has presented undisputed evidence demonstrating that the Respondent is 
not authorized to practice veterinary medicine in the State of 
Wisconsin, the location of his business as stated on his DEA 
Certificate of Registration. The Deputy Administrator concurs with 
Judge Randall's finding that, as Respondent is not authorized to 
practice veterinary medicine in Wisconsin, it is reasonable to infer 
that Respondent likewise is not authorized to handle controlled 
substances in Wisconsin. James D. Okun, 62 FR 16,871 (1997). Without 
state authority to handle controlled substances, the Respondent is not 
eligible to possess a DEA registration for a place of business in 
Wisconsin.
    The Deputy Administrator also 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 5,661 (2000); 
Jesus R. Juarez, M.D., 62 FR 14,945 (1997); see also Philip E. Kirk, 
M.D., 48 FR 32,887 (1983), 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 BM4863812, issued to David H. Mills, 
D.V.M., be, and it hereby is, revoked; and that any pending 
applications for the renewal or modification of said Certificate be, 
and hereby are, denied.
    This order is effective June 19, 2002.

    Dated: May 6, 2002.
John B. Brown III,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 02-12487 Filed 5-17-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-M