Notice2025-23475

Timothy Balisky, 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
December 19, 2025

Issuing agencies

Justice DepartmentDrug Enforcement Administration

Full Text

<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 90 Issue 242 (Friday, December 19, 2025)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 242 (Friday, December 19, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59584-59585]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2025-23475]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration


Timothy Balisky, N.P.; Decision and Order

    On July 28, 2025, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA or 
Government) issued an Order to Show Cause (OSC) to Timothy Balisky, 
N.P., of Huntersville, North Carolina (Registrant). Request for Final 
Agency Action (RFAA), Exhibit (RFAAX) 1 at 1, 4. The OSC proposed the 
revocation of Registrant's Certificate of Registration, No. MB7242352, 
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 
North Carolina, the state in which [he is] registered with DEA.'' Id. 
at 2 (citing 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3)).\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ According to the OSC and Agency records, Registrant's 
registration expired on July 31, 2025. RFAAX 1, at 2. The fact that 
a registrant allows his registration to expire during the pendency 
of an administrative enforcement proceeding 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 his right to file a written request 
for hearing, and that if he failed to file such a request, he would be 
deemed to have waived his right to a hearing and be in default. Id. at 
2-3 (citing 21 CFR 1301.43). Here, Registrant did not request a 
hearing, and the Agency finds him to be in default. RFAA, at 2-3.\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 
September 9, 2025, the Agency finds that service of the OSC on 
Registrant was adequate. Specifically, the Government's Declaration 
from a DEA Diversion Investigator (DI) indicates that on July 29, 
2025, Registrant was personally served with a copy of the OSC. RFAAX 
2, at 1; see also id. at 3 (Form-DEA 12 signed by Registrant, 
acknowledging receipt of the OSC).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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. 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 deemed admitted. According to the 
OSC, effective May 13, 2025, the North Carolina State Board of Nursing 
issued an Order of Summary Suspension, suspending Registrant from the 
practice of nursing in North Carolina. RFAAX 1, at 2. According to 
North Carolina online records, of which the Agency takes official 
notice,\3\ the current status of Registrant's North Carolina nurse 
practitioner license is ``No License due to Discipline.'' North 
Carolina Board of Nursing License Verification, <a href="https://portal.ncbon.com/licenseverification/search.aspx">https://portal.ncbon.com/licenseverification/search.aspx</a> (last visited date of 
signature of this Order). Accordingly, the Agency finds that Registrant 
is not licensed as a nurse practitioner in North Carolina, the state in 
which he is registered with DEA.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \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).
    \4\ 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 decision, is not licensed as 
a nurse practitioner in North Carolina. 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#c9adaca8e7a8adada6e7a8bdbda6bba7acb0ba89adaca8e7aea6bf"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="c9adaca8e7a8adada6e7a8bdbda6bba7acb0ba89adaca8e7aea6bf">[email&#160;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. 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).\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 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 at 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 at 27617.

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

[[Page 59585]]

    According to North Carolina statute, ``dispense'' means ``to 
deliver a controlled substance to an ultimate user 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.'' N.C. Gen. Stat. 
90-87(8) (2024). Further, a ``practitioner'' means a ``physician . . . 
or other person licensed, registered or otherwise permitted to 
distribute, dispense, conduct research with respect to or to administer 
a controlled substance so long as such activity is within the normal 
course of professional practice or research in [the] State.'' Id. at 
90-87(22)(a).\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ North Carolina law permits licensed nurse practitioners to 
handle controlled substances provided certain requirements are met. 
See 21 N.C. Admin. Code 36.0809 (2024); N.C. Gen. Stat. 90-
87(22)(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Here, the undisputed evidence in the record is that Registrant 
lacks authority to practice as a nurse practitioner in North Carolina. 
As discussed above, an individual must be a licensed practitioner to 
dispense a controlled substance in North Carolina. Thus, because 
Registrant lacks authority to practice as a nurse practitioner in North 
Carolina and, therefore, is not authorized to handle controlled 
substances in North Carolina, 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. 
MB7242352 issued to Timothy Balisky, 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 Timothy Balisky, N.P., to renew 
or modify this registration, as well as any other pending application 
of Timothy Balisky, N.P., for additional registration in North 
Carolina. This Order is effective January 20, 2026.

Signing Authority

    This document of the Drug Enforcement Administration was signed on 
December 15, 2025, by Administrator Terrance C. Cole. 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. 2025-23475 Filed 12-18-25; 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 December 19, 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.