[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 243 (Wednesday, December 19, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 71959-71960]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-24608]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Drug Enforcement Administration
Patrick K. Riggs, M.D.; Denial of Application
On June 19, 2007, the Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of
Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration, issued an Order to
Show Cause to Patrick K. Riggs (Respondent), of Fort Worth, Texas. The
Show Cause Order proposed the denial of Respondent's pending
application for a DEA Certificate of Registration as a practitioner, on
the ground that his registration would be ``inconsistent with the
public interest.'' Show Cause Order at 1 (citing 21 U.S.C. 823(f) &
824(a)(4)).
The Show Cause Order specifically alleged that ``from May 2005
through August 2006 [Respondent], ordered 22,500 dosage units of
hydrocodone from Henry Schein, Inc.,'' and that notwithstanding his
``assertions to Henry Schein, Inc., that [he was] practicing medicine
during that period [Respondent], subsequently admitted to DEA Diversion
Investigators that [he] had not practiced medicine since 1997 and had
no current patients.'' Id. The Show Cause Order alleged that on August
31, 2006, Respondent had met with DEA Diversion Investigators at his
home and admitted to them that he had consumed all of the hydrocodone
drugs that he had obtained from Henry Schein, Inc. Id.
The Show Cause Order further alleged that Respondent did not
maintain the purchasing and dispensing records required under federal
law for the controlled substances he had obtained from Henry Schein,
Inc. Id. Finally, the Show Cause Order alleged that during the
aforementioned meeting with DEA investigators, Respondent had upon the
advice of counsel, voluntarily surrendered his DEA Registration and
agreed not to apply for a new registration for a two-year period. Id.
at 2.
On June 25, 2007, the Show Cause Order, which also notified
Respondent of his right to request a hearing on the allegations, was
served on him by a Federal Express delivery to his residence, which is
also the address of his proposed registered location. Because: (1) More
than thirty days have passed since service of the Show Cause Order, and
(2) neither Respondent, nor anyone purporting to represent him, has
requested a hearing, I conclude that Respondent has waived his right to
a hearing. See 21 CFR 1301.43(d). I therefore enter this Final Order
without a hearing based on relevant material contained in the
investigative file, see id. 1301.43(e), and make the following
findings.
Findings
Respondent previously held a DEA Registration as a practitioner,
which authorized him to dispense controlled substances in schedules II
through V. On various dates between May 2005 and August 2006, DEA
received several reports from Henry Schein, Inc., regarding
Respondent's excessive purchases of controlled substances. These
reports showed that during the above period, Respondent purchased
22,500 dosage units of combination hydrocodone/acetaminophen (all in
10/325 mg. strength), 1400 dosage units of clonazepam (in both 1 mg.
and 2 mg. strength), 1200 dosage units of aspirin with codeine (60
mg.), 500 dosage units of acetaminophen with codeine (60 mg.), and
hydrocodone with ibuprofen (7.5/200 mg.).\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The reports also showed that Respondent had purchased two
anabolic steroids, nandrolone and testosterone cypionate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sometime around September 2005, a Schein employee apparently
questioned Respondent regarding his purchases. Accordingly, on
September 24, 2005, Respondent faxed a letter which stated that he had
served as ``a consultant to the TXSBME'' \2\ from 1995 through 1998
``in the area of disciplinary action,'' and had ``earned * * * a great
many enemies (because of my testimony in med[ical] malpractice cases
for the state.'' Respondent further wrote that he was engaged in the
practice of ``general medicine,'' and that his ``patient base is
select. The concentration is chronic pain secondary to terminal
illness[,] i.e., cancer.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Presumably, the Texas State Board of Medical Examiners.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On August 31, 2006, DEA investigators went to Respondent's
residence (and registered location) and met with Respondent and his
attorney regarding his excessive purchases. During the interview,
Respondent was asked what medications he took. Respondent went to
another room and retrieved approximately twenty-five containers of non-
controlled prescription drugs. Upon further questioning, Respondent
admitted that he had been on methadone and pulled an empty container of
methadone from his pocket.
During the interview, Respondent also admitted that he had not
practiced medicine since 1997 and did not have any patients. One of the
investigators then presented to Respondent's attorney a spreadsheet
listing his controlled substance purchases from Schein. After
Respondent and his lawyer were allowed to privately discuss the matter,
Respondent admitted that he had used all of the controlled substances
which he had purchased from Schein. Respondent also stated that to
prevent damaging his liver, he had ground up the hydrocodone tablets to
separate out the acetaminophen. Respondent also admitted that he had
failed to maintain purchasing and dispensing records as required by
Federal law.
Based on this information, the investigators advised Respondent's
counsel that they would seek an Order to Show Cause to revoke his
registration unless he voluntarily surrendered it. After consulting
with his attorney, Respondent voluntarily surrendered his registration
and signed the applicable form.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ On the form, Respondent also ``agree[d] not to re apply for
a period of two years.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Two months later, on October 30, 2006, Respondent submitted an
application for a new registration. On the form, Respondent
acknowledged that he had surrendered his registration and explained
that ``[t]he surrender[] could be classified as a misunderstanding
secondary to misinformation. I view it[] as an unusual set of
unnecessary and
[[Page 71960]]
humiliating circumstances brought together by a malicious third
party.''
Discussion
Section 303(f) of the Controlled Substances Act provides that
``[t]he Attorney General shall register practitioners * * * to dispense
* * * controlled substances in schedule II, III, IV, or V, if the
applicant is authorized to dispense * * * controlled substances under
the laws of the State in which he practices.'' 21 U.S.C. 823(f).
Section 303(f) further provides that ``[t]he Attorney General may deny
an application for such registration if he determines that the issuance
of such registration would be inconsistent with the public interest.''
Id. In making the public interest determination, the Act requires the
consideration of the following factors:
(1) The recommendation of the appropriate State licensing board
or professional disciplinary authority.
(2) The applicant's experience in dispensing * * * controlled
substances.
(3) The applicant's conviction record under Federal or State
laws relating to the manufacture, distribution, or dispensing of
controlled substances.
(4) Compliance with applicable State, Federal, or local laws
relating to controlled substances.
(5) Such other conduct which may threaten the public health and
safety.
Id.
[T]hese factors are * * * considered in the disjunctive.'' Robert
A. Leslie, M.D., 68 FR 15227, 15230 (2003). I ``may rely on any one or
a combination of factors, and may give each factor the weight [I]
deem[] appropriate in determining whether a registration should be
revoked.'' Id. Moreover, I am ``not required to make findings as to all
of the factors.'' Hoxie v. DEA, 419 F.3d 477, 482 (6th Cir. 2005); see
also Morall v. DEA, 412 F.3d 165, 173-74 (D.C. Cir. 2005). In this
case, I conclude that factors two and four are dispositive.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Having considered all of the factors, I conclude that
factors one, three and five are not relevant.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As the record demonstrates, Respondent acquired large quantities of
controlled substances including 22,500 tablets of combination
hydrocodone/acetaminophen (a schedule III controlled substance, 21 CFR
1308.13(e)), 1400 dosage units of clonazepam (a schedule IV controlled
substance, 21 CFR 1308.14(c)), as well as drugs combining codeine with
acetaminophen or aspirin. Respondent admitted that he personally used
the drugs.
The record also shows that on September 24, 2005, Respondent
represented to an employee of Henry Schein, Inc., that he was
``practic[ing] general medicine,'' with a ``concentration in chronic
pain secondary to terminal illness, i.e., cancer.'' During the August
31, 2006 interview, however, Respondent admitted that he had not
practiced medicine since 1997 and that he had no patients. The record
further shows that after he faxed the letter to Schein, Respondent
continued to order and received large quantities of controlled
substances from it. Based on this evidence, I conclude that on numerous
occasions, Respondent violated federal law by ``knowingly or
intentionally * * * acquir[ing] or obtain[ing] possession of a
controlled substance by misrepresentation, fraud, [or] deception.'' 21
U.S.C. 843(a)(3).
Respondent further admitted that he did not maintain the purchasing
and dispensing records as required by federal law. See id. Sec.
827(a)(3). Based on the above, I conclude that Respondent's record of
non-compliance with federal laws related to controlled substances and
his experience of self-dispensing controlled substances, establishes
that granting him a registration would be ``inconsistent with the
public interest.'' Id. Sec. 823(f).
Order
Pursuant to the authority vested in me by 21 U.S.C. 823(f), as well
as 28 CFR 0.100(b) & 0.104, I order that the application of Patrick K.
Riggs, M.D., for a DEA Certificate of Registration as a practitioner
be, and it hereby is, denied. This order is effective January 18, 2008.
Dated: December 7, 2007.
Michele M. Leonhart,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. E7-24608 Filed 12-18-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-P