[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 105 (Wednesday, June 2, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30860-30861]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-13144]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration

[Docket No. 10-14]


Shepard Ginandes, M.D.; Revocation of Registration

    On September 28, 2009, I, the Deputy Administrator of the Drug 
Enforcement Administration, issued an Order to Show Cause and Immediate 
Suspension of Registration to Shepard Ginandes, M.D. (Respondent), of 
Honolulu, Hawaii. The Show Cause Order proposed the revocation of 
Respondent's DEA Certificate of Registration, BG0241024, and the denial 
of any pending applications to renew or modify his registration, on the 
ground that his ``continued registrations is inconsistent with the 
public interest.'' Show Cause Order at 1 (citing 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(4) & 
823(f)).
    The Show Cause Order specifically alleged that on twenty-four 
different occasions between March 2007 and January 2009, Respondent had 
given prescriptions to law enforcement personnel for schedule II 
controlled substances including methadone, morphine, oxycodone, and 
hydromorphone, the schedule III controlled substance hydrocodone, and 
the schedule IV controlled substances alprazolam and diazepam. Id. at 
1-2. The Order further alleged that Respondent's office did not have 
any exam rooms and medical equipment; that he did not take a medical 
history or require the officers to fill out any paperwork; did not 
conduct a physical examination; and that the officers would simply 
write their name, address and the drug they were seeking on a piece of 
paper which Respondent would take and then use to prepare a 
prescription. Id. at 2. The Order thus alleged that these prescriptions 
lacked a legitimate medical purpose and were issued in violation of 21 
CFR 1306.04. Id. The Order further alleged that Respondent was 
continuing to prescribe controlled substances without a legitimate 
medical purpose. Id.
    Based on the above, I further found that there was a substantial 
likelihood that Respondent ``will continue to write controlled 
substance prescriptions for other than a legitimate medical purpose.'' 
Id. I therefore concluded that Respondent's continued registration 
during the pendency of the proceeding ``would constitute an imminent 
danger to the public health and safety'' and ordered that his 
registration be immediately suspended. Id.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The Order also informed Respondent of his right to request a 
hearing on the allegations and the procedure for doing so, including 
that he must file a written request for a hearing ``[w]ithin 30 days 
after the date of receipt of'' the Order, Show Cause Order at 2, 
that ``[m]atters are deemed filed upon receipt by the Hearing 
Clerk,'' id. at 3 (citing 21 CFR 1316.45), and that should he 
``decline to file a request for a hearing'' he ``shall be deemed to 
have waived the right to a hearing.'' Id. (citing 21 CFR 1301.43(d) 
& (e)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On September 30, 2009, the Order was served on Respondent. On 
November 3, 2009, Respondent, through his counsel, filed a letter 
requesting a hearing. ALJ Dec. at 2. Therein, Respondent also sought 
``a reversal of the proposed suspension.'' Id. The matter was then 
placed on the docket of the Agency's Administrative Law Judges.
    The next day, the Government moved for summary disposition on the 
ground that on September 30, 2009, the State of Hawaii had ``suspended/
revoked'' Respondent's state controlled substances registration and 
that ``Respondent is no longer authorized to administer, prescribe, 
dispense or possess controlled substances.'' Gov. Mot. for Summ. Disp. 
at 1. Based on long-standing precedent which holds that ``possessing 
authority under state law to handle controlled substance is an 
essential condition for holding a DEA registration,'' the Government 
requested that the ALJ grant its motion, cancel the pending proceeding 
and forward the matter to me with the recommendation that I revoke 
Respondent's registration and deny any pending applications. Id. at 2-
3. Noting that Respondent's hearing request was not received until 
November 3, 2009, and was therefore untimely, the Government also 
argued that Respondent had waived his right to a hearing. Id. n.1.
    Thereafter, the ALJ ordered that Respondent file a Response to the 
Government's Motion no later than November 12, 2009. ALJ Dec. at 3. The 
ALJ also stayed the proceeding. Id.
    Respondent did not, however, file a Response. Id. Thereafter, the 
ALJ found that ``Respondent's lacks authority to handle controlled 
substance in the State of Hawaii,'' the State in which he is licensed 
to practice medicine. Id. Because holding authority under state law to 
handle controlled substances is an essential condition for holding a 
DEA registration, the ALJ granted the Government's Motion for Summary 
Disposition and recommended that his registration be revoked and his 
pending application be denied. Id. at 4-6.
    The ALJ then forwarded the matter to me for final agency action. 
Having considered the record as a whole, I find that under the Agency's 
regulation, Respondent's request for a hearing was untimely and that he 
has not offered good cause for his failure to file a timely request. 21 
CFR 1301.43(d). I therefore find that Respondent waived his right to 
contest the proceeding. Id. (1301.43(e)).
    I further find that on September 4, 2009, Respondent applied to 
renew his registration, which was to expire on September 30, 2009. I 
therefore find that Respondent's registration has remained in effect, 
albeit in suspended status, pending the issuance of this Decision and 
Final Order. See 5 U.S.C. 557(c).
    I further find that on September 30, 2009, the Administrator of the 
Narcotics Enforcement Division, Department of Public Safety, State of 
Hawaii, ``suspended/revoked'' Respondent's State of Hawaii Controlled 
Substance

[[Page 30861]]

Registration. Gov. Mot. for Summ. Disp., Ex. A (letter from Keith 
Kamita, Administrator, Narcotics Enforcement Division, Hawaii Dept. of 
Public Safety to Shepard Ginandes, M.D.) Based on Administrator 
Kamita's letter, I further find that Respondent is ``no longer 
authorized to administer, prescribe, dispense or posses any controlled 
substance'' in Hawaii. Id.
    Under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), a practitioner must be 
currently authorized to handle controlled substances in ``the 
jurisdiction in which he practices'' in order to maintain a DEA 
registration. See 21 U.S.C. 802(21) (``[t]he term `practitioner' means 
a physician * * * 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''). See also id. Sec.  823(f) (``The Attorney 
General shall register practitioners * * * if the applicant is 
authorized to dispense * * * controlled substances under the laws of 
the State in which he practices.''). As these provisions make plain, 
possessing authority under state law to handle controlled substances is 
an essential condition for holding a DEA registration.
    Accordingly, DEA has held repeatedly that the CSA requires the 
revocation of a registration issued to a practitioner whose state 
license has been suspended or revoked. David Wang, 72 FR 54297, 54298 
(2007); Sheran Arden Yeates, 71 FR 39130, 39131 (2006); Dominick A. 
Ricci, 58 FR 51104, 51105 (1993); Bobby Watts, 53 FR 11919, 11920 
(1988). See also 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3)(authorizing the revocation of a 
registration ``upon a finding that the registrant * * * has had his 
State license or registration suspended [or] revoked * * * and is no 
longer authorized by State law to engage in the * * * distribution [or] 
dispensing of controlled substances'').
    The record here establishes that the Respondent's State of Hawaii 
Controlled Substances Registration has been suspended/revoked by the 
Administrator of the Narcotics Enforcement Division, Department of 
Public Safety, State of Hawaii. As the Administrator's letter makes 
clear, Respondent is ``no longer authorized to administer, prescribe, 
dispense or posses any controlled substance'' under Hawaii law and 
thus, he no longer meets the requirement for obtaining and maintaining 
a registration under Federal law. Because Respondent is not entitled to 
maintain his DEA registration, his registration will be revoked and his 
pending application to renew his registration will be denied.

Order

    Pursuant to the authority vested in me by 21 U.S.C. 823(f) & 
824(a), as well as 28 CFR 0.100(b) & 0.104, I hereby order that DEA 
Certificate of Registration, BG0241024, issued to Shepard Ginandes, 
M.D., be, and it hereby is, revoked. I further order that the pending 
application to renew this registration be, and it hereby is, denied. 
This order is effective immediately.

    Dated: February 25, 2010.
Michele M. Leonhart,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2010-13144 Filed 6-1-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-P