Notice2025-13354

Diana Clouthier, N.P.; 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
July 16, 2025

Issuing agencies

Justice DepartmentDrug Enforcement Administration

Full Text

<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 90 Issue 134 (Wednesday, July 16, 2025)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 134 (Wednesday, July 16, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32022-32023]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2025-13354]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration


Diana Clouthier, N.P.; Decision and Order

    On February 13, 2025, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA or 
Government) issued an Order to Show Cause (OSC) to Diana Clouthier, 
N.P., of Canon City, Colorado (Registrant). Request for Final Agency 
Action (RFAA), Exhibit (RFAAX) 1, at 1, 4. The OSC proposed the 
revocation of Registrant's DEA Certificate of Registration (COR) No. 
MC5780639, alleging that Registrant is ``currently without authority to 
. . . handle controlled substances in the State of Colorado, the state 
in which [she is] registered with DEA.'' Id. at 2 (citing 21 U.S.C. 
824(a)(3)).
    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 2-3 (citing 21 CFR 1301.43). Here, Registrant did not request a 
hearing. RFAA, at 2.\1\ ``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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Based on the Government's submissions in its RFAA dated 
April 7, 2025, the Agency finds that service of the OSC on 
Registrant was adequate. The included declaration from a DEA 
Diversion Investigator (DI) indicates that on February 20, 2025, DI 
attempted to serve Registrant the OSC at her personal residence and 
by phone, but both attempts were unsuccessful. RFAAX 2, at 1. 
Registrant returned the phone call and informed DI that she was not 
in Colorado and ``would not confirm when she would be returning'' to 
Colorado. Id. On February 24, 2025, DI emailed the OSC to Registrant 
and Registrant replied acknowledging receipt, but did not request a 
hearing in her response. Id. at 2-4. Accordingly, the Agency finds 
that the Government's service of the OSC on Registrant was adequate. 
See Mohammed S. Aljanaby, M.D., 82 FR 34,552, 34,552 (2017) (finding 
that service by email satisfies due process where the email is not 
returned as undeliverable and other methods have been unsuccessful); 
Emilio Luna, M.D., 77 FR 4,829, 4,830 (2012) (same).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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] 1316.67.'' Id. at 1301.43(f)(1). Here, the 
Government has requested final agency action based on Registrant's 
default pursuant to 21 CFR 1301.43(c) and (f). RFAA, at 1, 4; see also 
21 CFR 1316.67.

[[Page 32023]]

Findings of Fact

    The Agency finds that, in light of Registrant's default, the 
factual allegations in the OSC are deemed admitted. According to the 
OSC, Registrant's Colorado registered nursing license, advanced 
practice nurse license, and nurse practitioner prescriptive authority 
license were suspended by the Colorado State Board of Nursing on 
October 21, 2024. RFAAX 1, at 1-2; see also RFAAX 4. According to 
Colorado online records, of which the Agency takes official notice,\2\ 
Registrant's Colorado licenses have a status of ``Suspended.'' Colorado 
DORA License Search, <a href="https://apps2.colorado.gov/dora/licensing/lookup/licenselookup.aspx">https://apps2.colorado.gov/dora/licensing/lookup/licenselookup.aspx</a> (last visited date of signature of this Order). 
Accordingly, the Agency finds that Registrant is not licensed as a 
practitioner in Colorado, the state in which she is registered with 
DEA.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 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).
    \3\ 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.'' The material fact here is 
that Registrant, as of the date of this Order, is not licensed as a 
nurse in Colorado. 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#e6828387c887828289c8879292899488839f95a6828387c8818990"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="3e5a5b5f105f5a5a51105f4a4a514c505b474d7e5a5b5f10595148">[email&#160;protected]</span></a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion

    Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3), the Attorney General may 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 71,371, 71,372 (2011), pet. for rev. denied, 481 F. 
App'x 826 (4th Cir. 2012); Frederick Marsh Blanton, M.D., 43 FR 27,616, 
27,617 (1978).\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ This rule derives from the text of two provisions of the 
Controlled Substances Act (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 or she is no longer authorized to dispense controlled 
substances under the laws of the state in which he or she practices. 
See, e.g., James L. Hooper, M.D., 76 FR at 71,371-72; Sheran Arden 
Yeates, M.D., 71 FR 39,130, 39,131 (2006); Dominick A. Ricci, M.D., 
58 FR 51,104, 51,105 (1993); Bobby Watts, M.D., 53 FR 11,919, 11,920 
(1988); Frederick Marsh Blanton, M.D., 43 FR at 27,617.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to Colorado statute, ``dispense'' means ``to deliver a 
controlled substance to an ultimate user, patient, or research subject 
by or pursuant to the lawful order of a practitioner, including the 
prescribing, administering, packaging, labeling, or compounding 
necessary to prepare the substance for that delivery.'' Colo. Rev. 
Stat. Sec.  18-18-102(9) (West 2025). Further, a ``practitioner'' means 
a ``physician . . . or other person licensed, registered, or otherwise 
permitted, by this state, to distribute, dispense, conduct research 
with respect to, administer, or to use in teaching or chemical 
analysis, a controlled substance in the course of professional practice 
or research.'' Id. Sec.  18-18-102(29).
    Here, the undisputed evidence in the record is that Registrant is 
not a currently licensed practitioner in Colorado. As discussed above, 
a nurse must be a licensed practitioner to dispense a controlled 
substance in Colorado. Thus, because Registrant's nursing licenses are 
suspended in Colorado and, therefore, she is not currently authorized 
to handle controlled substances in Colorado, Registrant is not eligible 
to maintain a DEA registration in Colorado. 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. 
MC5780639 issued to Diana Clouthier, N.P. 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 Diana Clouthier, N.P., to renew 
or modify this registration, as well as any other pending application 
of Diana Clouthier, N.P., for additional registration in Colorado. This 
Order is effective August 15, 2025.

Signing Authority

    This document of the Drug Enforcement Administration was signed on 
July 10, 2025, by Acting Administrator Robert J. Murphy. 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. 2025-13354 Filed 7-15-25; 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 July 16, 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.