Notice2025-04752
Rachel Jackson, P.A.; Decision and Order
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
March 20, 2025
Issuing agencies
Justice DepartmentDrug Enforcement Administration
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 90 Issue 53 (Thursday, March 20, 2025)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 53 (Thursday, March 20, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13198-13199]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2025-04752]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Drug Enforcement Administration
Rachel Jackson, P.A.; Decision and Order
On October 1, 2023, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA or
Government) issued an Order to Show Cause (OSC) to Rachel Jackson,
P.A., of Sabattus, Maine (Registrant). Request for Final Agency Action
(RFAA), Exhibit (RFAAX) 4, at 1, 4. The OSC proposed the revocation of
Registrant's Certificate of Registration No. MG5136723, alleging that
Registrant's registration should be revoked because Registrant is
``currently without authority to prescribe, administer, dispense, or
otherwise handle controlled substances in the State of Maine, the state
in which [she is] registered with DEA.'' Id. at 1-2 (citing 21 U.S.C.
824(a)(3)).\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ According to Agency records, Registrant's registration
expired on December 31, 2024. The fact that a registrant allows her
registration to expire during the pendency of an OSC does not impact
the Agency's jurisdiction or prerogative under the Controlled
Substances Act (CSA) to adjudicate the OSC to finality. Jeffrey D.
Olsen, M.D., 84 FR 68474, 68476-79 (2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The OSC notified Registrant of her right to file a written request
for hearing, and that if she failed to file such a request, she would
be deemed to have waived her right to a hearing and be in default. Id.
at 2 (citing 21 CFR 1301.43). Here, Registrant did not request a
hearing. RFAA, at 3.\2\ ``A default, unless excused, shall be deemed to
constitute a waiver of the registrant's/applicant's right to a hearing
and an admission of the factual allegations of the [OSC].'' 21 CFR
1301.43(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Based on the Government's submissions in its RFAA dated
August 20, 2024, the Agency finds that service of the OSC on
Registrant was adequate. Specifically, the Declaration from a DEA
Diversion Investigator (DI) indicates that on November 8, 2023,
Registrant was successfully served a copy of the OSC via email to an
email address associated with Registrant. RFAAX 1, at 2; Mohammed S.
Aljanaby, M.D., 82 FR 34552, 34552 (2017) (finding that service by
email satisfies due process where the email is not returned as
undeliverable and other methods have been unsuccessful). As noted in
the DI's Declaration, on October 5, 2023, the DI and other DEA
officials attempted in-person service of the OSC to an address
associated with Registrant, but the service was unsuccessful. RFAAX
1, at 1-2. On October 10, 2023, the DI provided her contact
information to Registrant via email to Registrant's aforementioned
email address. Id. at 2. On October 12, 2023, the DI called all five
phone numbers listed in the information database for Registrant, as
well as Registrant's spouse. Id. Regarding the phone numbers that
were still in service, the DI was unable to reach Registrant and
left a voicemail for Registrant with her contact information. Id.
Finally, on November 9, 2023, the DI mailed copies of the OSC via
certified and first-class mail to two different addresses associated
with Registrant. Id. On November 20, 2023, the DI received
confirmation of receipt of the certified mail, and upon search of
the USPS mail tracking system, the DI confirmed that Registrant
received and signed for the certified mail for both addresses. Id.;
RFAAX 3. In sum, the Agency finds that Registrant was successfully
served the OSC by email and the DI's efforts to serve Registrant by
other means were `` `reasonably calculated, under all the
circumstances, to apprise [Registrant] of the pendency of the
action.' '' Jones v. Flowers, 547 U.S. 220, 226 (2006) (quoting
Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co., 339 U.S. 306, 314
(1950)). Therefore, due process notice requirements have been
satisfied.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Further, ``[i]n the event that a registrant . . . is deemed to be
in default . . . DEA may then file a request for final agency action
with the Administrator, along with a record to support its request. In
such circumstances, the Administrator may enter a default final order
pursuant to [21 CFR] Sec. 1316.67.'' Id. section 1301.43(f)(1). Here,
the Government has requested final agency action based on Registrant's
default pursuant to 21 CFR 1301.43(c), (f), 1301.46. RFAA, at 1; see
also 21 CFR 1316.67.
Findings of Fact
The Agency finds that, in light of Registrant's default, the
factual allegations in the OSC are admitted. According to the OSC, on
June 9, 2023, Registrant requested that the Maine Board of Licensure in
Medicine permit her to voluntarily surrender her Maine physician
assistant license. RFAAX 4, at 2. Effective July 11, 2023, the Maine
Board of Licensure in Medicine granted Registrant's request. Id.
According to Maine online records, of which the Agency takes official
notice, Registrant's Maine physician assistant license is inactive and
listed under a status of ``Voluntary Surrender.'' \3\ Government of
Maine Regulatory Licensing & Permitting Search, <a href="https://www.pfr.maine.gov/ALMSOnline/ALMSQuery/Welcome.aspx">https://www.pfr.maine.gov/ALMSOnline/ALMSQuery/Welcome.aspx</a> (last visited date
of signature of this Order). Accordingly, the Agency finds that
Registrant is not licensed to practice as a physician assistant in
Maine, the state in which she is registered with DEA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Under the Administrative Procedure Act, an agency ``may take
official notice of facts at any stage in a proceeding--even in the
final decision.'' United States Department of Justice, Attorney
General's Manual on the Administrative Procedure Act 80 (1947) (Wm.
W. Gaunt & Sons, Inc., Reprint 1979). Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 556(e),
``[w]hen an agency decision rests on official notice of a material
fact not appearing in the evidence in the record, a party is
entitled, on timely request, to an opportunity to show the
contrary.'' Accordingly, Registrant may dispute the Agency's finding
by filing a properly supported motion for reconsideration of
findings of fact within fifteen calendar days of the date of this
Order. Any such motion and response shall be filed and served by
email to the other party and to the DEA Office of the Administrator,
Drug Enforcement Administration at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#84e0e1e5aae5e0e0ebaae5f0f0ebf6eae1fdf7c4e0e1e5aae3ebf2"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="b0d4d5d19ed1d4d4df9ed1c4c4dfc2ded5c9c3f0d4d5d19ed7dfc6">[email protected]</span></a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Discussion
Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3), the Attorney General is authorized
to suspend or revoke a registration issued under 21 U.S.C. 823 ``upon a
finding that the registrant . . . has had his State license or
registration suspended . . . [or] revoked . . . by competent State
authority and is no longer authorized by State law to engage in the . .
. dispensing of controlled substances.'' With respect to a
practitioner, DEA has also long held that the possession of authority
to dispense controlled substances under the laws of the state in which
a practitioner engages in professional practice is a fundamental
condition for obtaining and maintaining a practitioner's registration.
Gonzales v. Oregon, 546 U.S. 243, 270 (2006) (``The Attorney General
can register a physician to dispense controlled substances `if the
applicant is authorized to dispense . . . controlled substances under
the laws of the State in which he practices.' . . . The very definition
of a `practitioner' eligible to prescribe includes physicians
`licensed, registered, or otherwise permitted, by the United States or
the jurisdiction in which he practices' to dispense controlled
substances. Sec. 802(21).''). The Agency has applied these principles
consistently. See, e.g., James L. Hooper, M.D., 76 FR 71371, 71372
(2011), pet. for rev. denied, 481 F. App'x 826 (4th Cir. 2012);
Frederick Marsh Blanton, M.D., 43 FR 27616, 27617 (1978).\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ This rule derives from the text of two provisions of the
CSA. First, Congress defined the term ``practitioner'' to mean ``a
physician . . . or other person licensed, registered, or otherwise
permitted, by . . . the jurisdiction in which he practices . . ., to
distribute, dispense, . . . [or] administer . . . a controlled
substance in the course of professional practice.'' 21 U.S.C.
802(21). Second, in setting the requirements for obtaining a
practitioner's registration, Congress directed that ``[t]he Attorney
General shall register practitioners . . . if the applicant is
authorized to dispense . . . controlled substances under the laws of
the State in which he practices.'' 21 U.S.C. 823(g)(1). Because
Congress has clearly mandated that a practitioner possess state
authority in order to be deemed a practitioner under the CSA, DEA
has held repeatedly that revocation of a practitioner's registration
is the appropriate sanction whenever he is no longer authorized to
dispense controlled substances under the laws of the state in which
he practices. See, e.g., James L. Hooper, M.D., 76 FR 71371-72;
Sheran Arden Yeates, M.D., 71 FR 39130, 39131 (2006); Dominick A.
Ricci, M.D., 58 FR 51104, 51105 (1993); Bobby Watts, M.D., 53 FR
11919, 11920 (1988); Frederick Marsh Blanton, M.D., 43 FR 27617.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 13199]]
According to Maine statute, ``Unless licensed by the [Board of
Licensure in Medicine], an individual may not practice medicine or
surgery or a branch of medicine or surgery . . . within the State by
diagnosing, relieving in any degree or curing . . . a human disease,
ailment, defect or complaint, whether physical or mental . . . by
attendance or by advice, or by prescribing or furnishing a drug,
medicine, appliance, manipulation, method or a therapeutic agent
whatsoever or in any other manner unless otherwise provided by statutes
of this State.'' Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 32, section 3270 (2024). Further,
Maine statute states that, ``[a] physician assistant may not render
medical services until the physician assistant has applied for and
obtained from either the Board of Licensure in Medicine or the Board of
Osteopathic Licensure: . . . [a] license, which must be renewed
biennially with the board that issued the initial license.'' Id.
section 3270-E(1)(A).
Here, the undisputed evidence in the record is that Registrant
lacks authority to practice as a physician assistant in Maine because
she voluntarily surrendered her Maine physician assistant license to
the Maine Board of Licensure in Medicine and her license is now
inactive. As discussed above, an individual must be licensed by the
Maine Board of Licensure in Medicine to handle controlled substances in
Maine. Thus, because Registrant lacks authority to practice as a
physician assistant in Maine and, therefore, is not authorized to
handle controlled substances in Maine, Registrant is not eligible to
maintain a DEA registration. Accordingly, the Agency will order that
Registrant's DEA registration be revoked.
Order
Pursuant to 28 CFR 0.100(b) and the authority vested in me by 21
U.S.C. 824(a), I hereby revoke DEA Certificate of Registration No.
MG5136723 issued to Rachel Jackson, P.A. Further, pursuant to 28 CFR
0.100(b) and the authority vested in me by 21 U.S.C. 823(g)(1), I
hereby deny any pending applications of Rachel Jackson, P.A., to renew
or modify this registration, as well as any other pending application
of Rachel Jackson, P.A., for additional registration in Maine. This
Order is effective April 21, 2025.
Signing Authority
This document of the Drug Enforcement Administration was signed on
March 13, 2025, by Acting Administrator Derek Maltz. That document with
the original signature and date is maintained by DEA. For
administrative purposes only, and in compliance with requirements of
the Office of the Federal Register, the undersigned DEA Federal
Register Liaison Officer has been authorized to sign and submit the
document in electronic format for publication, as an official document
of DEA. This administrative process in no way alters the legal effect
of this document upon publication in the Federal Register.
Heather Achbach,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, Drug Enforcement Administration.
[FR Doc. 2025-04752 Filed 3-19-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on March 20, 2025.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.