[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 65 (Wednesday, April 3, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14818-14819]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-8043]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Drug Enforcement Administration
[Docket No. 94-81]
Shahid Musud Siddiqui, M.D.; Revocation of Registration
On September 8, 1994, the Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of
Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), issued an
Order to Show Cause to Shahid Musud Siddiqui, M.D. (Respondent), of
Brooklyn, New York, notifying him of an opportunity to show cause as to
why DEA should not revoke his DEA Certificate of Registration
AS5232979, under 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(4) and (5), and deny any pending
applications for renewal of this registration under 21 U.S.C. 823(f),
because his continued registration under 21 U.S.C. 823(f), because his
continued registration would be inconsistent with the public interest,
and because he had been mandatorily excluded from participation in a
program pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1310a-7(a).
In a letter dated September 21, 1994, the Respondent, through
counsel, requested a hearing, and the matter was docketed before
Administrative Law Judge Paul A. Tenney. The Respondent requested
numerous delays. On March 16, 1995, he filed his Prehearing Statement,
writing that at that time he was proceeding pro se in this matter.
On September 1, 1995, counsel for the Government field a Motion for
Summary Disposition, asserting that the Respondent was not duly
authorized to possess, prescribe, dispense, or otherwise handle
controlled substances under State law in the State of New York, the
jurisdiction in which he is registered with the DEA. Attached to the
motion was a copy of the State of New York Department of Health, State
Board for Professional Medical Conduct's (Medical Board) Determination
and Order dated October 26, 1994, revoking the Respondent's license to
practice medicine in the State of New York. Also attached was a copy of
the Administrative Review Board's Decision and Order issued on March
13, 1995, which sustained the Medical Board's revocation of the
Respondent's medical license.
On September 20, 1995, the Respondent filed a response to the
Government's motion, asserting that factual and legal errors were made
in the proceedings resulting in the revocation of his medical license
in the State of New York. However, the Respondent did not dispute the
authenticity of the Medical Board's revocation order or of the
Administrative Review Board's order sustaining the actions of the
Medical Board.
On September 27, 1995, Judge Tenney issued his Opinion and
Recommended Ruling, finding that the Respondent (1) lacked
authorization to practice medicine in the State of New York, (2) lacked
authorization to handle controlled substances in that State, and (3)
that there was no genuine issue of material fact in that regard.
Accordingly, Judge Tenney granted the Government's Motion for Summary
Disposition and recommended that the Respondent's DEA Certificate of
Registration be revoked. Neither party filed exceptions to his
decision, and on October 27, 1995, Judge Tenney transmitted the record
of these proceedings and his opinion to the Deputy Administrator.
The Deputy Administrator has considered the record in its entirety,
and pursuant to 21 C.F.R. 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 DEA does not have the statutory authority under the Controlled
Substances Act to issue or maintain a registration if the applicant or
registrant is without state authority to handle controlled substances
in the state in which he conducts his business. 21 U.S.C. 802(21),
823(f), and 824(a)(3). This prerequisite 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). As Judge Tenney correctly noted, ``[i]n the instant case, it is
clear [that] the Respondent is not authorized to practice medicine in
the State of New York, nor is he authorized to handle controlled
substances in that State.'' Although the Respondent asserted that he
was licensed to practice medicine in New Jersey, as Judge Tenney noted,
such an assertion is irrelevant. The DEA Certificate of Registration at
issue in these proceedings was granted to allow the Respondent to
handle controlled substances for his medical practice in New York.
Judge Tenney also properly granted the Government's Motion for
Summary Disposition. Here, the parties did not dispute the fact that
the Respondent was unauthorized to handle controlled substances in New
York. The Respondent did assert that the Medical Board wrongfully had
revoked his medical license. However, as Judge Tenney correctly noted,
the DEA
[[Page 14819]]
administrative proceeding ``is not an appropriate forum for wholesale
review of state criminal and administrative actions taken by the State
of New York arising out of the laws of the State of New York. To allow
it to be so would be to permit a wide collateral attack upon such
convictions. See Lowell O. Kir, M.D., 58 FR 15,378 (1993). The
convictions in state court are considered res judicata and [the]
Respondent may not relitigate these matters. See Robert A. Leslie,
M.D., 60 FR 14,004 (1995).''
Therefore, it is well-settled that when no question of material
fact is involved, a plenary, adversary administrative proceeding
involving evidence and cross-examination of witnesses is not
obligatory. See Dominick A. Ricci, M.D., supra. See also Phillip 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 AS5232979, issued to Shahid Musud Siddiqui,
M.D., be, and it hereby is, revoked. The Deputy Administrator further
orders that any pending applications for the renewal of such
registration be, and they hereby are, denied. This order is effective
May 3, 1996.
Dated: March 28, 1996.
Stephen H. Greene,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 96-8043 Filed 4-2-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-M
