He is working under labcorp out of Texas and several other states and the testing is FALSE HE IS a fraud
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 147 (Tuesday, July 30, 1996)]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-19257]
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
[Docket No. 96-7]
David R. Nahin, M.D.; Revocation of Registration
On November 9, 1995, the Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), issued an Order to Show Cause to David R. Nahin, M.D., (Respondent) of Waukesha, Wisconsin, notifying him of an opportunity to show cause as to why DEA
should not revoke his DEA Certificate of Registration, AN7645229, under 21 U.S.C. 824(a), and deny any pending applications for renewal of such registration as a practitioner under 21 U.S.C. 823(f), for the reason that his continued registration would be inconsistent with the public interest. On November 27, 1995, the Respondent, through counsel, filed a timely request for a hearing, and the matter was docketed before Administrative Law Judge Mary Ellen Bittner. However, on January 19,
1996, the Government filed a Motion for Summary Disposition and to Stay Proceedings with copies of supporting documents. Specifically, the Respondent voluntarily had surrendered his medical license pursuant to a copy of the State of Wisconsin, Medical Examining Board's (Medical Board) Final Decision and Order dated April 28, 1993. Further, pursuant to an order of the Medical Board's dated August 9, 1994, the Respondent was granted a limited medical license which precluded him from having physician-patient contact. Also, a letter dated September 27, 1994, from the State of Wisconsin, Department of Regulation and Licensing, informed DEA that, ``while Dr. Nahin is not prohibited from holding a DEA registration, use of the registration in prescribing medications would constitute a violation of his limited license.'' The Respondent was afforded an opportunity to respond to the Government's motion on or before February 5, 1996, but no response was filed.
On February 15, 1996, Judge Bittner issued her Opinion and Recommended Decision, (1) finding that the Respondent, practicing medicine under
a limited license in Wisconsin, lacked authorization to handle controlled substances there, (2) granting the Government's Motion for Summary Disposition, and (3) recommending that the Respondent's DEA Certificate of Registration be revoked. Neither party filed exceptions to her decision, and on March 15, 1996, Judge Bittner transmitted the record of these proceedings and her opinion to the Deputy Administrator.
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 decision of the Administrative Law Judge. The Drug Enforcement Administration cannot register or maintain the registration of a practitioner who is not duly authorized to handle controlled substances in the State in which he conducts his business. See 21 U.S.C. 823 (f) (authorizing the Attorney General to register a practitioner to dispense controlled substances only if the applicant is authorized to dispense controlled substances
under the laws of the state in which he or she practices); 802(21) (defining ``practitioner'' as one authorized by the United States or the state in which he or she practices to handle controlled substances in the course of professional practice or research); and 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3) (authorizing the Attorney General to revoke a registration upon as finding that the registrant ``has had his State license or registration suspended, revoked, or denied by competent State authority and is no longer authorized by State law to engage in * * * dispensing of controlled substances * * *''). This rerequisite has been consistently upheld. See Dominick A. Ricci, M.D., 58 FR 51, 104 (1993); James H. Nickens, M.D., 57 FR 59, 847 (1992); Roy E. Hardman, M.D., 57 FR 49, 195 (1992); Myong S. Yi, M.D., 54 FR 30, 618 (1989); Bobby Watts, M, D., 53 FR 11, 919 (1988).
Here, it is clear and undisputed that the Respondent currently is not authorized to handle controlled substances in Wisconsin. Likewise, since the respondent lacks state authority to handle controlled
substances, DEA lacks authority to continue his registration. Judge Bittner also properly granted the Government's motion for summary disposition. The parties did not dispute that the Respondent
was unauthorized to handle controlled substances in Wisconsin, the state in which he conducts his practice. Therefore, it is well-settled that when no question of fact is involved, a plenary, adversary
administrative proceeding involving evidence and cross-examination of witnesses is not obligatory. Dominick A. Ricci, M.D., 58 FR at 51, 104; 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); Alfred Tennyson Smurthwaite, M.D., 43 FR 11, 873 (1978); NLRB v. International Association of Bridge, Structural and Ornamental Ironworkers, AFL-CIO, 549 F.2d 634 (9th Cir. 1977).
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 AN7645229, previously issued to David R. Nahin, M.D., be, and it hereby is, revoked, and any pending application for renewal of such registration is hereby denied. This order is effective August 29, 1996.
Dated: July 24, 1996.
Stephen H. Greene,
[FR Doc. 96-19257 Filed 7-29-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-M