[Federal Register: February 5, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 24)]
[Notices]
[Page 5579]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr05fe04-130]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Drug Enforcement Administration
[Docket No. 03-36]
Annette Antonsson, M.D., Denial of Application
On June 4, 2003, the Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of
Division Control, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), issued an
Order to Show Cause to Annette Antonsson, M.D. (Respondent) of San
Francisco, California, notifying her of an opportunity to show cause as
to why DEA should not deny her application for a DEA certificate of
registration as a practitioner pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 824(a) and deny
any pending applications for renewal or modification of Respondent's
expired DEA registration BA2457097. As a basis for revocation, the
Order to Show Cause alleged that Respondent voluntarily surrendered her
State license to practice medicine to the Medical Board of California
effective May 24, 1999, and that, accordingly, she is not authorized to
handle controlled substances in California, the State in which she
applied to be registered.
On July 5, 2003, Respondent, acting pro se, timely requested a
hearing in this matter. In her request for a hearing, Respondent
admitted she had surrendered her license and was ``currently not
licensed in California.'' On July 24, 2003, the Presiding
Administrative Law Judge Mary Ellen Bittner (Judge Bittner) issued the
Government, as well as Respondent, an Order for Prehearing Statements.
In lieu of filing a prehearing statement, the Government filed
Government's request for Stay of Proceedings and Motion for Summary
Disposition. The Government argued that the Respondent is without
authorization to handle controlled substances in the State of
California, and as a result, further proceedings in the matter were not
required. Attached to the Government's motion was a copy of the Medical
Board of California's Decision and Order, dated June 28, 1999, adopting
the Stipulation for Surrender of License which Respondent agreed to and
signed on May 24, 1999.
On July 31, 2003, Judge Bittner issued a Memorandum to Counsel
providing Respondent until August 31, 2003, to respond to the
Government's motion. Respondent did not file any response.
On September 23, 2003, Judge Bittner issued her Opinion and
Recommended Decision of the Administrative Law Judge (Opinion and
Recommended Decision). As part of her recommended ruling, Judge Bittner
granted the Government's Motion for Summary Disposition and found that
the Respondent lacked authorization to handle controlled substances in
California, the jurisdiction in which she was applying to be
registered. Judge Bittner also recommended that the Respondent's
application for a DEA certificate of registration be denied. No
exceptions were filed by either party to Judge Bittner's Opinion and
Recommended Decision and on November 13, 2003, the record of these
proceedings was transmitted to the Office of the Acting DEA Deputy
Administrator.
The Acting Deputy Administrator has considered the record in its
entirety and pursuant to 21 CFR 1316.67, hereby issues her final order
based upon findings of fact and conclusions of law as hereinafter set
forth. The Acting Deputy Administrator adopts, in full, the Opinion and
Recommended Decision of the Administrative Law Judge.
The Acting Deputy Administrator finds that Respondent was
previously issued DEA certificate of registration BA 2457097, which
expired in June 2002. Subsequently, Respondent filed an application for
renewal on October 31, 2002, which was appropriately treated by DEA as
a request for a new registration. The Acting Deputy Administrator
further finds that, effective May 24, 1999, Respondent voluntarily
surrendered her State license to practice medicine to the California
Medical Board and has also admitted that she is currently not licensed
to practice in California. Therefore, the Acting Deputy Administrator
finds Respondent is currently not licensed to practice medicine in
California and as a result, it is reasonable to infer she is also
without authorization to handle controlled substances in that State.
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 business. See 21 U.S.C. 802(21),
823(f) and 824(a)(3). This prerequisite has been consistently upheld.
See Karen Joe Smiley, M.D., 68 FR 48944 (2003); Dominick A. Ricci,
M.D., 58 FR 51104 (1993); Bobby Watts, M.D., 53 FR 11919 (1988).
Here, it is clear that Respondent is not currently licensed to
handle controlled substances in California, the jurisdiction in which
she has applied for registration. Therefore, she is not entitled to a
DEA registration in that State.
Accordingly, the Acting Deputy Administrator of the Drug
Enforcement Administration, pursuant to the authority vested in her by
21 U.S.C. 823 and 824 and 28 CFR 0.100(b) and 0.104, hereby orders that
the application for a DEA certificate of registration submitted by
Annette Antonsson, M.D., be, and it hereby is, denied. This order is
effective March 8, 2004.
Dated: January 7, 2004.
Michele M. Leonhart
Acting Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 04-2341 Filed 2-4-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-M