[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 209 (Tuesday, October 31, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 74521-74522]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-23958]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration


Siamak Arassi, M.D.; Decision and Order

    On May 24, 2023, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA or 
Government) issued an Order to Show Cause (OSC) to Siamak Arassi, M.D. 
(Registrant). Request for Final Agency Action (RFAA), Exhibit (RFAAX) 1 
at 1, 3. The OSC proposed the revocation of Registrant's Certificate of 
Registration No. BA8851809 at the registered address of 19115 W Capitol 
Dr., Suite 117, Brookfield, Wisconsin 53045. Id. at 1. The OSC alleged 
that Registrant's registration should be revoked because Registrant is 
``currently without authority to handle controlled substances in the 
State of Wisconsin,'' the state in which he is registered with DEA. Id. 
at 2 (citing 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3)).
    The OSC notified Registrant of his right to file with DEA a written 
request for hearing, and that if he failed to file such a request, he 
would be deemed to be in default. OSC, at 2 (citing 21 CFR 1301.43). 
Here, Registrant did not request a hearing. RFAA, at 2.\1\ ``A default, 
unless excused, shall be deemed to constitute a waiver of the 
registrant's/applicant's right to a hearing and an admission of the 
factual allegations of the [OSC].'' 21 CFR 1301.43(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ On June 1, 2023, a DEA Diversion Investigator (DI) emailed 
Registrant at his personal email address, attaching a copy of the 
OSC with a delivery and read receipt request. RFAAX 2, at 2. DI 
received notification that the email was delivered successfully. Id. 
Registrant responded on the same day by email but did not request a 
hearing. RFAAX 2, Attachment E. Based on the information in the 
record, the Agency finds that the Government's service of the OSC on 
Registrant was adequate. RFAA, at 2 (citing Emilio Luna, M.D., 77 FR 
4829, 4830 (2012) (finding service via email can satisfy due 
process)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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] Sec.  1316.67.'' Id. Sec.  1301.43(f)(1). Here, 
the Government has requested final agency action based on Registrant's 
default pursuant to 21 CFR 1301.43(c), (f). See also id. Sec.  1316.67.

Findings of Fact

    The Agency finds that, in light of Registrant's default, the 
factual allegations in the OSC are admitted. According to the OSC, on 
February 15, 2023, the State of Wisconsin Medical

[[Page 74522]]

Examining Board issued a Final Decision and Order indefinitely 
suspending Registrant's license to practice medicine and surgery. RFAAX 
1, at 2; RFAAX 2, Attachment C, at 15.
    According to Wisconsin's online records, of which the Agency takes 
official notice, Registrant's Wisconsin medical license remains 
suspended.\2\ Wisconsin Department of Safety and Professional Services, 
Wisconsin Credential/License Search, https://licensesearch.wi.gov/ 
(last visited date of signature of this Order). Therefore, the Agency 
finds that Registrant is not authorized to practice medicine nor to 
handle controlled substances in Wisconsin, the state in which he is 
registered with DEA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Under the Administrative Procedure Act, an agency ``may take 
official notice of facts at any stage in a proceeding--even in the 
final decision.'' United States Department of Justice, Attorney 
General's Manual on the Administrative Procedure Act 80 (1947) (Wm. 
W. Gaunt & Sons, Inc., Reprint 1979). Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 556(e), 
``[w]hen an agency decision rests on official notice of a material 
fact not appearing in the evidence in the record, a party is 
entitled, on timely request, to an opportunity to show the 
contrary.'' Accordingly, Registrant may dispute the Agency's finding 
by filing a properly supported motion for reconsideration of 
findings of fact within fifteen calendar days of the date of this 
Order. Any such motion and response shall be filed and served by 
email to the other party and to the DEA Office of the Administrator, 
Drug Enforcement Administration at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#244041450a4540404b0a4550504b564a415d57644041450a434b52"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="91f5f4f0bff0f5f5febff0e5e5fee3fff4e8e2d1f5f4f0bff6fee7">[email protected]</span></a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion

    Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3), the Attorney General is authorized 
to suspend or revoke a registration issued under 21 U.S.C. 823 ``upon a 
finding that the registrant . . . has had his State license or 
registration suspended . . . [or] revoked . . . by competent State 
authority and is no longer authorized by State law to engage in the . . 
. dispensing of controlled substances.'' With respect to a 
practitioner, DEA has also long 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, e.g., James L. Hooper, D.O., 76 FR 71371 (2011), pet. for rev. 
denied, 481 F. App'x 826 (4th Cir. 2012); Frederick Marsh Blanton, 
D.O., 43 FR 27616, 27617 (1978).\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ This rule derives from the text of two provisions of the 
Controlled Substances Act (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(g)(1). Because Congress has clearly mandated that a 
practitioner possess state authority in order to be deemed a 
practitioner under the CSA, DEA has held repeatedly that revocation 
of a practitioner's registration is the appropriate sanction 
whenever he is no longer authorized to dispense controlled 
substances under the laws of the state in which he practices. See, 
e.g., James L. Hooper, 76 FR 71371-72; Sheran Arden Yeates, D.O., 71 
FR 39130, 39131 (2006); Dominick A. Ricci, D.O., 58 FR 51104, 51105 
(1993); Bobby Watts, D.O., 53 FR 11919, 11920 (1988); Frederick 
Marsh Blanton, 43 FR 27617.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to Wisconsin statute, ``dispense'' means ``to deliver a 
controlled substance to an ultimate user or research subject by or 
pursuant to the lawful order of a practitioner, including the 
prescribing, administering, packaging, labeling or compounding 
necessary to prepare the substance for that delivery.'' Wis. Stat. 
section 961.01(7) (2023). Further, a ``practitioner'' means a 
``physician . . . or other person licensed, registered, certified or 
otherwise permitted to distribute, dispense, conduct research with 
respect to, administer or use in teaching or chemical analysis a 
controlled substance in the course of professional practice or research 
in [Wisconsin].'' Id. section 961.01(19)(a).
    Here, the undisputed evidence in the record is that Registrant 
currently lacks authority to practice medicine in Wisconsin. As already 
discussed, a practitioner must be a licensed practitioner to dispense 
controlled substances in Wisconsin. Thus, because Registrant lacks a 
license to practice medicine in Wisconsin and, therefore, is not 
authorized to handle controlled substances in Wisconsin, Registrant is 
not eligible to maintain a DEA registration. Accordingly, the Agency 
will order that Registrant's DEA registration be revoked.

Order

    Pursuant to 28 CFR 0.100(b) and the authority vested in me by 21 
U.S.C. 824(a), I hereby revoke DEA Certificate of Registration No. 
BA8851809 issued to Siamak Arassi, M.D. Further, pursuant to 28 CFR 
0.100(b) and the authority vested in me by 21 U.S.C. 823(g)(1), I 
hereby deny any pending applications of Siamak Arassi, M.D., to renew 
or modify this registration, as well as any other pending application 
of Siamak Arassi, M.D., for additional registration in Wisconsin. This 
Order is effective November 30, 2023.

Signing Authority

    This document of the Drug Enforcement Administration was signed on 
October 20, 2023, by Administrator Anne Milgram. 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. 2023-23958 Filed 10-30-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>