[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 131 (Monday, July 8, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 35816]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-17255]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Drug Enforcement Administration
[Docket No. 95-40]
Rita M. Coleman, M.D. Revocation of Registration
On May 26, 1995, the Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of
Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), issued an
Order to Show Cause to Rita M. Coleman, M.D., (Respondent), of Baldwin,
Maryland, notifying her of an opportunity to show cause as to why DEA
should not revoke her DEA Certificate of Registration, AC9351026, under
21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3) and deny any pending applications for renewal of
her registration as a practitioner under 21 U.S.C. 823(f), for the
reason that, on or about August 24, 1994, the Maryland Board of
Physician Quality Assurance (Medical Board) ordered the revocation of
her state license to practice medicine. Further, the Show Cause Order
noted that, in response to having her medical license revoked, the
Maryland State Department of Health and Mental Hygiene revoked the
Respondent's state controlled substances registration. Therefore, the
Respondent was not authorized to handle controlled substances in the
State of Maryland.
On June 14, 1995, the Respondent filed a response to the Order to
Show Cause, presenting matters in rebuttal to the show cause
allegations, but failing to either request or to waive her hearing
right. On June 19, 1995, a letter was sent from the Office of the
Administrative Law Judges, informing the Respondent that she had until
July 17, 1995, to elect a hearing. By letter dated July 3, 1995, the
Respondent wrote that she did not wish to waive her rights to an
administrative hearing, but she also noted that she was not in a
position to attend such a hearing. The Respondent also asked that her
June letter be considered a written statement of her position in the
matter. In response to the Respondent's July letter, Administrative Law
Judge Mary Ellen Bittner issued an order dated August 18, 1995, in
which she (1) noted the Respondent's conflicting positions, and (2)
determined that the Respondent effectively had provided notice that she
would not appear at an administrative hearing. Judge Bittner, citing 21
C.F.R. 1301.54(c) and (d), wrote that ``a person who waives a hearing
may file a statement of position[,] and that a person who requests a
hearing but fails to appear may be deemed to have waived the
opportunity for a hearing. Consequently, although [the] Respondent
asserts that she does not wish to waive her right to a hearing, I deem
her statement that she will not appear, in conjunction with her request
that her June 11 letter be considered her statement of position, such a
waiver.''
Accordingly, Judge Bittner ordered that (1) all proceedings before
her in the Respondent's case be terminated, and (2) the matter be
submitted to the Deputy Administrator for issuance of a final order. On
January 23, 1996, the case was transmitted to the Deputy Administrator
for his action.
Therefore, the Deputy Administrator, after reviewing the procedural
matters in this case, agrees with Judge Bittner and concludes that the
Respondent is deemed to have waived her hearing right. Accordingly,
after considering the materials submitted, the Deputy Administrator now
enters his final order in this matter without a hearing, pursuant to 21
CFR 1301.54(e) and 1301.57.
The Deputy Administrator finds that, on August 24, 1994, after
holding an administrative hearing, the Medical Board revoked the
Respondent's license to practice medicine in the State of Maryland.
Subsequently, the Division of Drug Control, Maryland State Department
of Health and Mental Hygiene, voided the Respondent's State of Maryland
Controlled Dangerous Substance Registration Certificate. Thus, the
Respondent is not authorized to practice medicine or to prescribe,
administer, or dispense controlled substances in the State of Maryland.
Further, in her letter filed June 14, 1995, the Respondent has not
challenged the authenticity of the Medical Board's revocation order or
the order revoking her registration to handle controlled substances.
The Respondent has not submitted any evidence contesting the act that
her medical license and controlled substances certificate have been
revoked.
The DEA does not have 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 she conducts her 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). Here, it is clear that the Respondent is neither currently
authorized to practice medicine nor to dispense controlled substances
in the State of Maryland. Therefore, the Respondent currently is not
entitled to a DEA registration.
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, AC9351026 previously issued to Rita M.
Coleman, 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
August 7, 1996.
Dated: July 1, 1996.
Stephen H. Greene,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 96-17255 Filed 7-5-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-M
