Lewis B. Boone, M.D., Revocation of Registration, Denial of Request for Change of Registered Location

Document Headings Document headings vary by document type but may contain the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document the number of the CFR title and the number of each part the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly related to the agency docket number / agency internal file number the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions See the Document Drafting Handbook for more details. Department of Justice Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. 03-22] On March 23, 2003, the Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), issued an Order to Show Cause to Lewis B. Boone, M.D. (Respondent) of Russell, Kentucky, notifying him of an opportunity to show cause as to why DEA should not revoke his DEA Certificate of Registration, BB7108550, as a practitioner pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3) and deny, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 823(f) , any pending applications or requests, including but not limited to, Respondent's request for a modification of his registration to reflect a move to an Ohio location. As a basis for revocation, the Order to Show Cause alleged that Respondent's license to practice medicine in Kentucky had been indefinitely restricted and that his medical license in Ohio had been permanently revoked. As a result, the Order alleged he was not authorized to handle controlled substances in either his current or proposed States of registration. On April 28, 2003, Respondent, acting pro se, timely requested a hearing in this matter. On May 1, 2003, the presiding Administrative Law Judge Mary Ellen Bittner (Judge Bittner) issued the Government, as well as Respondent, an Order for Prehearing Statements. On May 7, 2003, 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 Respondent was without auth…