[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 10 (Thursday, January 15, 2026)]
[Notices]
[Pages 1817-1818]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2026-00623]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration


Honorata Anna Itaman, N.P.; Decision and Order

    On March 18, 2025, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA or 
Government) issued an Order to Show Cause (OSC) to Honorata Anna 
Itaman, N.P., of Orlando, Florida (Applicant). Request for Final Agency 
Action (RFAA), Exhibit (RFAAX) 1, at 1, 4. The OSC proposed the denial 
of Applicant's application for a DEA Certificate of Registration, 
Control No. W24026383M, alleging that Applicant has been excluded from 
participation in Medicare, Medicaid, and all federal health care 
programs pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1320a-7(a). Id. at 2 (citing 21 U.S.C. 
824(a)(5)).\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Based on the Government's submissions in its RFAA dated July 
8, 2025, the Agency finds that service of the OSC on Applicant was 
adequate. Specifically, the Declaration from a DEA Diversion 
Investigator (DI) indicates that on March 25, 2025, the DI emailed 
the OSC to Applicant's registered email address, with the email 
successfully delivered, as well as mailed a copy of the OSC to 
Applicant's registered address. RFAAX 2, at 2; see also RFAAX 2A-2B. 
The DI's Declaration also indicates that on the same date, the DI, 
along with two DEA Special Agents and an additional DI, attempted 
personal service at Applicant's registered address without success. 
RFAAX 2, at 1. The Agency finds that the DI's efforts to serve 
Applicant were ```reasonably calculated, under all the 
circumstances, to apprise [Applicant] of the pendency of the 
action.''' Jones v. Flowers, 547 U.S. 220, 226 (2006) (quoting 
Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co., 339 U.S. 306, 314 
(1950)). Therefore, due process notice requirements have been 
satisfied. See Mohammed S. Aljanaby, M.D., 82 FR 34552, 34552 (2017) 
(finding that service by email satisfies due process where the email 
is not returned as undeliverable and other methods have been 
unsuccessful); Emilio Luna, M.D., 77 FR 4829, 4830 (2012) (same).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The OSC notified Applicant of her right to file a written request 
for hearing, and that if she failed to file such a request, she would 
be deemed to have waived her right to a hearing and be in default. 
RFAAX 1, at 2 (citing 21 CFR 1301.43). Here, Applicant did not request 
a hearing. RFAA, at 2. ``A default, unless excused, shall be deemed to 
constitute a waiver of the registrant's right to a hearing and an 
admission of the factual allegations of the [OSC].'' 21 CFR 1301.43(e). 
Further, ``[i]n the event that a registrant . . . is deemed to be in 
default . . . DEA may then file a request for final agency action with 
the Administrator, along with a record to support its request. In such 
circumstances, the Administrator may enter a default final order 
pursuant to [21 CFR] 1316.67.'' Id. 1301.43(f)(1). Here, the Government 
has requested final agency action based on Applicant's default pursuant 
to 21 CFR 1301.43(c), (f), and 1301.46. RFAA, at 3; see also 21 CFR 
1316.67.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The RFAA states that ``the Administrator is authorized to 
render DEA's final order without . . . making any findings of fact 
in this matter.'' RFAA, at 3 (citing 21 CFR 1301.43(c), (f), and 
1301.46). However, 21 CFR 1316.67 requires that the Administrator's 
final order ``set forth the final rule and findings of fact and 
conclusions of law upon which the rule is based.'' See JYA LLC d/b/a 
Webb's Square Pharmacy, 90 FR 31244, 31246 n.7 (2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Findings of Fact

    In light of Applicant's default, the factual allegations in the OSC 
are deemed admitted. 21 CFR 1301.43(e). Applicant is deemed to admit 
that on January 12, 2023, Applicant was indicted for wire fraud and 
conspiracy to commit wire fraud, both felonies, in connection to a 
scheme to sell fraudulent nursing school diplomas and transcripts 
obtained from accredited Florida-based nursing schools to individuals 
seeking licenses and jobs as registered nurses and licensed practical/
vocational nurses. RFAAX 1, at 1-2.
    On September 15, 2023, Applicant pleaded guilty to conspiracy to 
commit wire fraud. Id. at 2. On April 9, 2024, Applicant was convicted 
and sentenced to 21 months of imprisonment followed by three years of 
supervised release. Id. Based on Applicant's conviction, the U.S. 
Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector General 
(HHS/OIG) mandatorily excluded Applicant, effective September 19, 2024, 
from participation in Medicare, Medicaid, and all federal health care 
programs pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1320a-7(a) for a period of 11 years. Id. 
Accordingly, the Agency finds substantial record evidence that 
Applicant has been, and remains, excluded from federal healthcare 
programs.

II. Discussion

    Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(5), the Attorney General is authorized 
to suspend or revoke a registration upon finding that the registrant 
``has been excluded (or directed to be excluded) from participation in 
a program pursuant to section 1320a-7(a) of Title 42.'' The Agency has 
consistently held that it may also deny an application upon finding 
that an applicant has been excluded from a federal health care 
program.\3\ Mark Agresti, M.D., 90 FR 30098, 30099 (2025); Samirkumar 
Shah, M.D., 89 FR 71931, 71933 (2024); Arvinder Singh, M.D., 81 FR 
8247, 8248 (2016). The Agency found above based on substantial record 
evidence that Applicant has been, and remains, mandatorily excluded 
from federal health care programs pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1320a-7(a).\4\ 
Accordingly, the

[[Page 1818]]

Agency finds that substantial record evidence establishes the 
Government's prima facie case for denial of Applicant's application 
under 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ A statutory basis to deny an application pursuant to section 
823 is also a basis to revoke or suspend a registration pursuant to 
section 824, and vice versa, because doing ``otherwise would mean 
that all applications would have to be granted only to be revoked 
the next day . . . .'' Robert Wayne Locklear, M.D., 86 FR 33738, 
33744-45 (2021) (collecting cases).
    \4\ The Agency has consistently held that it may deny an 
application under 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(5) even if the conviction 
underlying the exclusion does not relate to controlled substances. 
See, e.g., Phong H. Tran, M.D., 90 FR 14383, 14384 n.10 (2025) 
(collecting cases).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Sanction

    Where, as here, the Government has met its prima facie burden of 
showing that Applicant's application for registration should be denied, 
the burden shifts to Applicant to show why she can be entrusted with a 
registration. Morall v. Drug Enf't Admin., 412 F.3d. 165, 174 (D.C. 
Cir. 2005); Jones Total Health Care Pharmacy, LLC v. Drug Enf't Admin., 
881 F.3d 823, 830 (11th Cir. 2018); Garrett Howard Smith, M.D., 83 FR 
18882 (2018). The issue of trust is necessarily a fact-dependent 
determination based on the circumstances presented by the individual 
registrant. Jeffrey Stein, M.D., 84 FR 46968, 46972 (2019); see also 
Jones Total Health Care Pharmacy, 881 F.3d at 833. Moreover, as past 
performance is the best predictor of future performance, the Agency has 
required that a registrant who has committed acts inconsistent with the 
public interest must accept responsibility for those acts and 
demonstrate that he will not engage in future misconduct. See Jones 
Total Health Care Pharmacy, 881 F.3d at 833; ALRA Labs, Inc. v. Drug 
Enf't Admin., 54 F.3d 450, 452 (7th Cir. 1995). The Agency requires a 
registrant's unequivocal acceptance of responsibility. Janet S. 
Pettyjohn, D.O., 89 FR 82639, 82641 (2024); Mohammed Asgar, M.D., 83 FR 
29569, 29573 (2018); see also Jones Total Health Care Pharmacy, 881 
F.3d at 830-31. In addition, a registrant's candor during the 
investigation and hearing is an important factor in determining 
acceptance of responsibility and the appropriate sanction. See Jones 
Total Health Care Pharmacy, 881 F.3d at 830-31; Hoxie v. Drug Enf't 
Admin., 419 F.3d 477, 483-84 (6th Cir. 2005). Further, the Agency has 
found that the egregiousness and extent of the misconduct are 
significant factors in determining the appropriate sanction. See Jones 
Total Health Care Pharmacy, 881 F.3d at 833 n.4, 834. The Agency also 
considers the need to deter similar acts by a registrant and by the 
community of registrants. Jeffrey Stein, M.D., 84 FR at 46972-73.
    Here, Applicant did not request a hearing or answer the allegations 
in the OSC and was therefore deemed to be in default. To date, 
Applicant has not filed a motion with the Office of the Administrator 
to excuse the default. 21 CFR 1301.43(c)(1). Applicant has thus failed 
to answer the allegations contained in the OSC and has not otherwise 
availed herself of the opportunity to refute the Government's case. As 
such, Applicant has not accepted responsibility for the proven 
violations, has made no representations regarding her future compliance 
with the CSA, and has not demonstrated that she can be trusted with 
registration. Accordingly, the Agency will order the denial of 
Applicant's application.

Order

    Pursuant to 28 CFR 0.100(b) and the authority vested in me by 21 
U.S.C. 823(g)(1), I hereby deny the pending application for a DEA 
Certificate of Registration, Control No. W24026383M, submitted by 
Honorata Anna Itaman, N.P., as well as any other pending of Honorata 
Anna Itaman, N.P., for additional registration in Florida. This Order 
is effective February 17, 2026.

Signing Authority

    This document of the Drug Enforcement Administration was signed on 
January 6, 2026, by Administrator Terrance C. Cole. That document with 
the original signature and date is maintained by DEA. For 
administrative purposes only, and in compliance with requirements of 
the Office of the Federal Register, the undersigned DEA Federal 
Register Liaison Officer has been authorized to sign and submit the 
document in electronic format for publication, as an official document 
of DEA. This administrative process in no way alters the legal effect 
of this document upon publication in the Federal Register.

Heather Achbach,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, Drug Enforcement Administration.
[FR Doc. 2026-00623 Filed 1-14-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-P