Base
Notice2021-214292021-10-01

Pharmacy 4 Less; Decision and Order

Justice Department, Drug Enforcement Administration

Document Excerpt

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. 18-41] On July 5, 2018, a former Assistant Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration (hereinafter, DEA or Government), issued an Order to Show Cause (hereinafter, OSC) to Pharmacy 4 Less, (hereinafter, Respondent) of Altamonte Springs, Florida. Administrative Law Judge Exhibit (hereinafter, ALJ Ex.) 1, (OSC) at 1. The OSC proposed to revoke its DEA Certificate of Registration (hereinafter, COR) No. FP5459082, and deny any pending applications for renewal or modification of such registration pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 823(f) and 824(a)(4) for the reason that Respondent's “continued registration is inconsistent with the public interest.” Id. In response to the OSC, Respondent timely requested a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge. ALJ Ex. 2. The hearing in this matter was held in Orlando, Florida, on November 5-7, 2018, and continued in Arlington, Virginia, on February 25, 2019. On May 22, 2019, Administrative Law Judge Mark M. Dowd (hereinafter, the ALJ) issued the Recommended Rulings, Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Decision (hereinafter, Recommended Decision or RD), and on June 11, 2019, the Government timely filed exceptions (hereinafter, Govt Exceptions) to the Recommended Decision. On June 23, 2019, the Respondent filed what it styled as a response to the Government's Exceptions (hereinafter, Resp Exceptions). [ *A ] According to the ALJ, the Respondent Pharmacy did not req

Read full document on FederalRegister.gov →

Full Document

Citation: 86 FR 54550