Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-19-01083/USCOURTS-ca4-19-01083-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
City Pharmacy of Charles Town, Inc.

City Pharmacy, LLC

Roger Lewis

United States of America
Appellee
Amy Wasanyi

David M. Wasanyi
Appellant

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-1083

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

DAVID M. WASANYI,

 Defendant - Appellant,

and

CITY PHARMACY, LLC; CITY PHARMACY OF CHARLES TOWN, INC.; 

AMY WASANYI; ROGER LEWIS,

 Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at 

Martinsburg. John Preston Bailey, District Judge. (3:16-cv-00024-JPB)

Submitted: December 30, 2019 Decided: February 20, 2020

Before HARRIS and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit 

Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

USCA4 Appeal: 19-1083 Doc: 23 Filed: 02/20/2020 Pg: 1 of 5
2

David M. Wasanyi, Appellant Pro Se. Greg Thomas Kinskey, Assistant United States 

Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Wheeling, West Virginia, 

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 19-1083 Doc: 23 Filed: 02/20/2020 Pg: 2 of 5
3

PER CURIAM:

David M. Wasanyi appeals from the district court’s order granting summary 

judgment in favor of the United States and holding that Wasanyi violated the 

Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970, 21 U.S.C. §§ 801-971 

(2012). The court imposed a civil penalty of $335,670. Wasanyi challenges the judgment 

on several bases but does not challenge the calculation of the civil penalty imposed. 

Finding no error, we affirm. 

We review “de novo the district court’s order granting summary judgment.” 

Jacobs v. N.C. Admin. Office of the Courts, 780 F.3d 562, 565 n.1 (4th Cir. 2015). “A 

district court ‘shall grant summary judgment if the movant shows that there is no genuine 

dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.’” 

Id. at 568 (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a)). “A dispute is genuine if a reasonable jury could 

return a verdict for the nonmoving party.” Id. (internal quotation marks omitted). In 

determining whether a genuine issue of material fact exists, the court “view[s] the facts and 

all justifiable inferences arising therefrom in the light most favorable to . . . the nonmoving 

party.” Id. at 565 n.1 (internal quotation marks omitted). However, “the nonmoving party 

must rely on more than conclusory allegations, mere speculation, the building of one 

inference upon another, or the mere existence of a scintilla of evidence.” Dash v. 

Mayweather, 731 F.3d 303, 311 (4th Cir. 2013).

Wasanyi raised several challenges to the court’s determination that he ignored 

obvious warning signs and filled illegitimate prescriptions and that this activity violated 21 

C.F.R. § 1306.04 (2019) and 21 U.S.C. § 842(a)(1) (2012), subjecting him to civil 

USCA4 Appeal: 19-1083 Doc: 23 Filed: 02/20/2020 Pg: 3 of 5
4

penalties. These challenges included: that the district court judge was influenced against 

him; that the Government deceived the court by citing requirements that prescribing 

physicians must follow instead of pharmacists; that the district court did not allow Wasanyi 

to adequately represent himself; that the Government expert’s affidavit was in error 

regarding payment methods and discussion of opioids; that minority-owned pharmacies 

were targeted; that the Government relied on inapplicable statutes and statistics; that the 

Government’s intention is to put minority-owned pharmacies out of business; that the civil 

prosecution is frivolous because the Government investigator did not personally see 

Wasanyi fill the prescriptions; that it is a violation of the West Virginia Code to refuse to 

fill a legitimate prescription based on method of payment; that a pharmacist cannot 

diagnose a patient to determine whether the prescription is for a legitimate purpose; that 

this civil prosecution is a violation of the Fourth Amendment because the pharmacist and 

patient-customers are minorities; and that the Pharmacist’s DEA manual should be the 

determining proof of whether a prescription is legitimate. 

We have carefully reviewed Wasanyi’s arguments, the parties’ filings, and the 

record and find no reversible error. The errors Wasanyi raises on appeal are either 

unsupported or contradicted by the evidence, not raised in the district court, or ignore the 

facts and applicable law. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. 

United States v. Wasanyi, No. 3:16-cv-00024-JPB (N.D.W. Va. Apr. 19, 2017 & Dec. 21, 

2018). We grant Wasanyi permission to proceed in forma pauperis. We deny Wasanyi’s 

petition for writ of mandamus. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 

USCA4 Appeal: 19-1083 Doc: 23 Filed: 02/20/2020 Pg: 4 of 5
5

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

USCA4 Appeal: 19-1083 Doc: 23 Filed: 02/20/2020 Pg: 5 of 5