[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 14 (Wednesday, January 22, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3625-3626]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-01159]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration


Roderick Lee Mitchell, M.D.; Decision and Order

    On June 10, 2013, the Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of 
Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration, issued an Order to 
Show Cause to Roderick Mitchell, M.D. (Respondent), of Daingerfield, 
Texas. The Show Cause Order proposed the revocation of Respondent's DEA 
Certificate of Registration AM1375179, which authorizes him to dispense 
controlled substances in schedules II through V as a practitioner, and 
the denial of any pending applications to renew or modify his 
registration, on the ground that he ``do[es] not have authority to 
handle controlled substances in the State of Texas,'' the State in 
which he is registered with DEA. Show Cause Order, at 1 (citing 21 
U.S.C. 824(a)(3)).
    As the factual basis for the action, the Show Cause Order alleged 
that on November 30, 2012, ``[t]he Texas Medical Board issued a [f]inal 
[o]rder . . . which immediately revoked [Respondent's] license to 
practice

[[Page 3626]]

medicine in the State of Texas.'' Id. The Show Cause Order also alleged 
that Respondent's Texas Department of Public Safety Controlled 
Substances Registration had ``expired on January 23, 2013.'' Id. The 
Order thus alleged that Respondent is ``currently without authority to 
handle controlled substance in the State of Texas.'' Id. Finally, the 
Show Cause Order notified Respondent of his right to either request a 
hearing or to submit a written statement while waiving his right to a 
hearing, the procedure for electing either option, and the consequence 
of failing to elect either option. See id. at 2 (citing 21 CFR 
1301.43).
    On June 14, 2013, a DEA Diversion Investigator (DI) and Task Force 
Officer (TFO) went to Respondent's residence in an attempt to 
personally serve him with the Show Cause Order. GX 2, at 3. The DI and 
TFO identified themselves to the person who answered the door, and who, 
based on Respondent's driver's license photo, appeared to be the 
Respondent; however, the person denied that he was Respondent. Id. 
According to the DI, this person shouted to them, ``[y']all need to 
stop harassing me'' and slammed the door shut. Id. at 4.
    Later that same day, the DI mailed two copies of the Show Cause 
Order to Respondent: one by Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested, 
the other by first class mail. Id. On June 17, Respondent received the 
mailing, as evidenced by both the signed return receipt card and a 
print-out from the U.S. Postal Services Track and Confirm Web page. GX 
5, at 3-4.
    Moreover, on July 2, 2013, Respondent wrote a letter to the DEA 
Resident Office in Tyler, Texas and enclosed a copy of a New Mexico 
Controlled Substance Registration. GX 9, at 3-4. Therein, Respondent 
wrote: ``This should clear up the issue of my ability to possess a DEA 
license. Please contact my attorney and I [sic] if this does not solve 
the problem of my possessing a DEA license.'' Id. at 3. However, in the 
letter, Respondent did not request a hearing on the allegations of the 
Show Cause Order. See id. Thereafter, on October 9, 2013, the 
Government submitted a Request for Final Agency Action along with the 
Investigative Record it compiled.
    Based on Respondent's failure to request a hearing, I find that he 
has waived his right to a hearing. See 21 CFR 1301.43(b). However, 
pursuant to 21 CFR 1301.43(c), Respondent's July 2, 2013 letter has 
been ``made a part of the record'' and will be considered in this 
Decision. I make the following findings of fact.

Findings

    Respondent is the holder of DEA Certificate of Registration 
AM1375179, which authorizes him to dispense controlled substances in 
schedules II through V, as a practitioner, at registered premises 
located in Daingerfield, Texas. GX 3, at 2. Respondent's registration 
does not expire until January 31, 2015. Id.
    Respondent formerly held a medical license issued by the Texas 
Medical Board. However, on November 30, 2012, the Board issued a final 
order revoking Respondent's medical license based on findings that he 
``failed to meet the standard of care and did not maintain adequate 
medical records.'' GX 6, at 2-3. On December 29, 2012, Respondent filed 
a motion for rehearing; however, on January 18, 2013, the Board denied 
the motion and the order of revocation became effective the same day. 
Id. at 2.
    Respondent also held a Texas Department of Public Safety Controlled 
Substances Registration. GX 7, at 2-3. However, on January 23, 2013, 
this registration expired. Id. Accordingly, I find that Respondent 
lacks authority under the laws of Texas to dispense controlled 
substances.

Discussion

    Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3), the Attorney General is authorized 
to suspend or revoke a registration issued under section 823 ``upon a 
finding that the registrant . . . has had his State license . . . 
suspended [or] revoked . . . by competent State authority and is no 
longer authorized by State law to engage in the . . . dispensing of 
controlled substances.'' Moreover, DEA has repeatedly held that the 
possession of authority to dispense controlled substances under the 
laws of the State in which a practitioner engages in professional 
practice is a fundamental condition for obtaining and maintaining a 
practitioner's registration. See James L. Hooper, 76 FR 71371, 71371 
(2011) (citing Leonard F. Faymore, 48 FR 32886, 32887 (1983)), pet. for 
rev. denied, Hooper v. Holder, No. 11-2351, 2012 WL 2020079, at *2 (4th 
Cir. Jun. 6, 2012) (unpublished).
    This rule derives from the text of two provisions of the CSA. 
First, Congress defined ``the term `practitioner' [to] mean[] a . . . 
physician . . . or other person licensed, registered or otherwise 
permitted, by . . . the jurisdiction in which he practices . . . to 
distribute, dispense, [or] administer . . . a controlled substance in 
the course of professional practice.'' 21 U.S.C. 802(21). Second, in 
setting the requirements for obtaining a practitioner's registration, 
Congress directed that ``[t]he Attorney General shall register 
practitioners . . . 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). Because Congress has clearly mandated 
that a practitioner possess state authority in order to be deemed a 
practitioner under the Act, DEA has held repeatedly that revocation of 
a practitioner's registration is the appropriate sanction when he is no 
longer authorized to dispense controlled substances under the laws of 
the State in which he practices medicine. See, e.g., Calvin Ramsey, 76 
FR 20034, 20036 (2011); Sheran Arden Yeates, M.D., 71 FR 39130, 39131 
(2006); Dominick A. Ricci, 58 FR 51104, 51105 (1993); Bobby Watts, 53 
FR 11919, 11920 (1988).
    Here, the Government has put forward unrefuted evidence that 
Respondent's Texas Medical License has been revoked and that his Texas 
controlled substance registration has expired. While Respondent 
submitted a copy of a state controlled substance registration issued by 
the State of New Mexico, the existence of this registration is 
immaterial because the DEA registration, which is the subject of the 
Order to Show Cause, authorizes him to dispense controlled substances 
in the State of Texas, where it is clear he is not authorized to 
dispense controlled substances and thus no longer meets the statutory 
definition of a practitioner under the Act. See 21 U.S.C. 802(21). 
Accordingly, I will order that Respondent's Certificate of Registration 
be revoked and that any pending applications to renew or modify this 
registration be denied.

Order

    Pursuant to the authority vested in me by 21 U.S.C. 823(f) and 
824(a)(3), as well as 28 CFR 0.100(b) and 0.104, I order that DEA 
Certificate of Registration AM1375179, issued to Roderick Lee Mitchell, 
M.D., be, and it hereby is, revoked. I further order that any pending 
application of Roderick Lee Mitchell, M.D., to renew or modify the 
aforesaid registration, be, and it hereby is, denied. This Order is 
effective February 21, 2014.

    Dated: January 15, 2014.
Thomas M. Harrigan,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2014-01159 Filed 1-21-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-P