[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 69 (Monday, April 11, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20010-20011]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-8535]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Drug Enforcement Administration
Layfe Robert Anthony, M.D.; Denial of Application
On December 3, 2009, the Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of
Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration, issued an Order to
Show Cause to Layfe Robert Anthony, M.D. (Respondent), of Salt Lake
City, Utah. The Show Cause Order proposed the revocation of
Respondent's DEA Certificate of Registration, BA8835449, and the denial
of any pending applications to renew or modify the registration, on the
ground that because of actions taken by the Utah Division of
Occupational and Professional Licensing, he lacks ``authority to
practice medicine or handle controlled substances in the State of
Utah,'' the State in which he is registered. Show Cause Order at 1
(citing 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3)). The Show Cause Order also notified
Respondent of his right to request a hearing or to submit a written
statement in lieu of a hearing, the procedures for doing so, and the
consequences for his failing to do so. Id. at 2 (citing 21 CFR 1301.43
& 1316.47).
On December 14, 2009, the Show Cause Order was served on Respondent
by certified mail addressed to him at his registered location. Since
that date, more than thirty days have passed and neither Respondent,
nor anyone purporting to represent him, has requested a hearing or
submitted a written statement. 21 CFR 1301.43(b) & (c). Accordingly, I
conclude that Respondent has waived his right to a hearing and issue
this Final Order based on the evidence contained in the investigative
record. 21 CFR 1301.43(d) & (e).
Respondent held DEA registration, BA8835449, which authorized him
to dispense controlled substances in schedules II through V as a
practitioner. According to the Agency's registration records,
Respondent's registration expired on June 30, 2007, and Respondent did
not submit his renewal application until July 2, 2007. Moreover, the
Agency did not automatically renew his registration.
Under 5 U.S.C. 558(c), ``[w]hen the licensee has made timely and
sufficient application for a renewal or a new license in accordance
with agency rules, a license with reference to an activity of a
continuing nature does not expire until the application has been
finally determined by the agency.'' Based on this provision, the
Government maintains that his registration has continued in effect.\1\
It has not. However, an application remains pending before the Agency.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Government did not explain the basis for its position
that an application filed after a registration expires is
nonetheless timely.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On January 28, 2009, the Utah Department of Commerce, Division of
Occupational and Professional Licensing (DOPL), revoked his ``licenses
to practice as a physician/surgeon and to administer and prescribe
controlled substances.'' Order, In re Layfe Robert Anthony, M.D., No.
DOPL-OSC-2001-70 (Utah Div. Occ. & Prof. Lic. Jan. 28, 2009).\2\
Accordingly, Respondent lacks
[[Page 20011]]
authority to dispense controlled substances in Utah, the State in which
he holds his DEA registration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The Order was based on a recommended decision of a three-
member panel designated by the Director of the DOPL to act as the
presiding officer in the proceeding. The panel's findings included,
inter alia, that: 1) Respondent had ``stored controlled substances
[Versed and Provigil] * * * in his personal vehicle,'' as well as
``41 prescription pads which contained multiple blank prescriptions
that had been presigned by other physicians'' at a clinic he was no
longer affiliated with, id. at 9, 11-12, 16-17; that he had failed
to comply with a previous state order that he ``submit a triplicate
copy'' of a controlled substance prescription (for testosterone, a
schedule III steroid) for review by the Division, id. at 21-22; that
he had committed unprofessional conduct when he advised A.S. to
administer to her son a controlled substance (Klonopin) which he had
prescribed to her, id. at 21, 23-24; and that he had violated
section 58-37-6(7)(o) of the Utah Controlled Substances Act by
issuing controlled substance prescriptions ``on forms which falsely
identified his address.'' Id. at 21 & 24.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Controlled Substances Act defines the ``[t]he term
`practitioner' [to] mean[] a physician * * * licensed, registered, or
otherwise permitted, by the United States or the jurisdiction in which
he practice * * * to distribute, dispense, [or] administer * * * a
controlled substance in the course of professional practice or
research.'' 21 U.S.C. 802(21). Moreover, under 21 U.S.C. 823(f),
``[t]he Attorney General shall register practitioners * * * to dispense
* * * controlled substances * * * if the applicant is authorized to
dispense * * * controlled substances under the laws of the State in
which he practices.'' DEA has therefore repeatedly held that holding
state authority is an essential requirement for obtaining a
registration and maintaining an existing one. See David W. 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 revocation
``upon a finding that the registrant * * * has had his State license or
registration suspended, revoked, or denied by competent State authority
and is no longer authorized by State law to engage in the * * *
dispensing of controlled substances'').
As the Final Order of the Utah DOPL makes clear, Respondent does
not possess authority under Utah law to dispense controlled substances.
Because he does not meet this requirement, his application will be
denied. See 21 U.S.C. 823(f).
Order
Pursuant to the authority vested in me by 21 U.S.C. 823(f), as well
as 28 CFR 0.100(b) & 0.104, I order that the application of Layfe
Robert Anthony, M.D., for a DEA Certificate of Registration as a
practitioner be, and it hereby is, denied. This Order is effective May
11, 2011.
Dated: April 1, 2011.
Michele M. Leonhart,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2011-8535 Filed 4-8-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-P