[Federal Register: March 26, 1999 (Volume 64, Number 58)]
[Notices]               
[Page 14769]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr26mr99-146]

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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration
[Docket No. 98-36]

 
Francois J. Saculla, M.D., Revocation of Registration

    On April 13, 1998, the Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of 
Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), issued an 
Order to Show Cause to Francois J. Saculla, M.D. (Respondent) of 
Racine, Wisconsin notifying him of an opportunity to show cause as to 
why DEA should not revoke his DEA Certificate of Registration 
BS1404552, and deny any pending applications for renewal of his 
registration pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 823(f) and 824(a)(3), for reason 
that he is not currently authorized to handle controlled substances in 
the State of Wisconsin.
    By letter dated May 21, 1998, but not filed with the Office of 
Administrative Law Judges until July 20, 1998, Respondent requested a 
hearing, and the matter was docketed before Administrative Law Judge 
Mary Ellen Bittner. On August 20, 1998, the Government filed a Motion 
for Summary Disposition alleging that Respondent is not currently 
authorized to handle controlled substances in the state in which he is 
registered with DEA and therefore DEA cannot maintain his registration. 
Judge Bittner provided Respondent with an opportunity to respond to the 
Government's motion, but no such response was filed.
    On October 14, 1998, Judge Bittner issued her Opinion and 
Recommended Decision finding that Respondent lacked authorization to 
handle controlled substances in Wisconsin; granting the Government's 
Motion for Summary Disposition; and recommending that Respondent's DEA 
Certificate of Registration be revoked. Neither party filed exceptions 
to her opinion, and on November 24, 1998, Judge Bittner transmitted the 
record of these proceedings to the then-Acting Deputy Administrator.
    The Deputy Administrator has considered the record in its entirely, 
and pursuant to 21 CFR 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 Opinion and Recommended 
Decision of the Administrative Law Judge. His adoption is in no manner 
diminished by any recitation of facts, issues and conclusions herein, 
or of any failure to mention a matter of fact or law.
    The Deputy Administrator finds that in a Final Decision and Order 
dated November 25, 1994, the State of Wisconsin, Medical Examining 
Board (Board) limited Respondent's license to practice medicine. The 
Board Order prohibited Respondent from treating any female patient; 
ordered that his entire practice be under the direct supervision of 
another physician; required that Respondent undergo psychological 
evaluation within 90 days; and advised that any additional limitations 
recommended by the psychologist would be adopted by the Board. In 
addition, costs were assessed against Respondent ion the amount of 
$22,000. The Order placed no limitations on Respondent's ability to 
handle controlled substances in Wisconsin. Therefore, Respondent 
presently possesses a limited license to practice medicine in 
Wisconsin.
    However, in order to practice medicine in Wisconsin an individual 
must not only be licensed but must also possess a registration. 
Respondent's Wisconsin registration expired on November 1, 1995. 
Therefore, Respondent is unable to practice medicine in the State of 
Wisconsin. The Deputy Administrator finds that it is reasonable to 
infer that if Respondent is unable to practice medicine in Wisconsin, 
he is also not authorized to handle controlled substances in that 
state. In his request for a hearing, Respondent did not deny that he 
was not currently authorized to handle controlled substances in 
Washington.
    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 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 Romeo J. 
Perez, M.D., 62 FR 16,193 (1997); Demetris A. Green, M.D. 61 FR 60,728 
(1996); Dominick A. Ricci, M.D., 58 FR 51,104 (1993).
    Here it is clear that Respondent is not currently authorized to 
handle controlled substances in Wisconsin, where he is registered with 
DEA. Since Respondent lacks this state authority, he is not entitled to 
a DEA registration in that state.
    In light of the above, Judge Bittner properly granted the 
Government's Motion for Summary Disposition. It is well settled that 
where there is no material question of fact involved, or when the 
material facts are agreed upon, there is no need for a plenary, 
administrative hearing. Congress did not intend for administrative 
agencies to perform meaningless tasks. Gilbert Ross, M.D., 61 FR 8664 
(1996); Philip E. Kirk, M.D., 48 FR 32,887 (1993), aff'd sub nom Kirk 
v. Mullen, 749 F.2d 297 (6th Cir. 1984).
    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 BS1404552, previously issued to Francois J. 
Saculla, M.D., be, and it hereby is, revoked. The Deputy Administrator 
further orders that any pending applications for renewal of such 
registration, be, and they hereby are, denied. This order is effective 
April 26, 1999.

    Dated: March 22, 1999.
Donnie R. Marshall,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 99-7441 Filed 3-25-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-M