Skip to main content
Notice2026-19821

Johann Farley, M.D.; 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
September 29, 2026

Issuing agencies

Justice DepartmentDrug Enforcement Administration

Full Text

<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 187 (Tuesday, September 29, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 187 (Tuesday, September 29, 2026)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61440-61442]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-19821]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration

[Docket No. 25-73]


Johann Farley, M.D.; Decision and Order

    On August 29, 2025, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA or 
Government) issued an Order to Show Cause (OSC) to Johann Farley, M.D., 
of Merrillville, Indiana (Registrant). Request for Final Agency Action 
(RFAA), Exhibit (RFAAX) 1, at 1, 3. The OSC proposed the revocation of 
Registrant's DEA registration, No. BF8869628,\1\ alleging that he has 
been mandatorily excluded ``from participation in Medicare, Medicaid, 
and all Federal health care programs pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1320a-
7(a).'' Id. at 1 (citing 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(5)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ According to the OSC and Agency records, Registrant's 
registration expired on September 30, 2025. RFAAX 1, at 1. The 
Agency has previously held that it is within its jurisdiction and 
discretion to adjudicate a matter to finality where a registration 
expired after issuance of an OSC and before issuance of a final 
order. See Jeffrey D. Olsen, M.D., 84 FR 68474, 68475-79 (2019); see 
also Abdul Naushad, M.D., 89 FR 54059, 54060 (2024) (applying the 
same principle and adjudicating a matter to finality where a 
registration expired before issuance of the OSC). Here, adjudicating 
the matter to finality will achieve similar goals as in Olsen; it 
will support future interactions between the Agency and Registrant, 
inform current and prospective members of the registrant community 
about the Agency's expectations, provide continuing education to all 
DEA personnel, help coordinate law enforcement efforts, and inform 
stakeholders, such as legislators and the public, about the Agency's 
work. Olsen, 84 FR at 68479.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On August 10, 2026, the Government submitted an RFAA to the 
Administrator requesting that the Agency \2\ issue a default final 
order revoking Registrant's registration. RFAA, at 1, 4. After 
carefully reviewing the entire record and conducting the analysis as 
set forth in detail below, the Agency grants the Government's RFAA and 
revokes Registrant's registration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The Controlled Substances Act delegates authority to the 
Attorney General, who has delegated it to the Administrator of DEA 
(the Agency). 28 CFR 0.100.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Procedural History

    On August 29, 2025, a DEA Diversion Investigator personally served 
the OSC on Registrant and sent an electronic copy of the OSC to his 
registered email address. RFAAX 2, at 1-2. On September 26, 2025, 
Registrant, through counsel, submitted a timely hearing request and 
answer to the Office of Administrative Law Judges. RFAAX 3. The matter 
was assigned to an administrative law judge, and on April 29, 2026, the 
Chief Administrative Law Judge (Chief ALJ) issued an Order for 
Prehearing Statements, ordering the Government to file a prehearing 
statement by May 13, 2026, and Registrant to file a prehearing 
statement by May 27, 2026. RFAAX 4, at 2, 4.
    The Government timely filed its prehearing statement on May 12, 
2026. RFAAX 5. On June 3, 2026, the Chief ALJ issued an Order Directing 
Compliance, noting that Registrant had not filed a prehearing statement 
by the initial May 27 deadline, and providing Registrant with a second 
opportunity to file a prehearing statement by June 8, 2026. RFAAX 6, at 
1.
    On the same day, Registrant sent an email to OALJ stating that the 
Order Directing Compliance was the `` `first notification' '' he had 
received in this matter, after which the Government forwarded its 
prehearing statement to Registrant. RFAAX 7, at 1, n.1. On June 9, 
2026, the Chief ALJ issued an Order Finding [Registrant] in Default and 
Terminating Proceedings (Termination Order), finding that Registrant 
failed for the second time to file a prehearing statement.\3\ RFAAX 7. 
The Chief ALJ further found Registrant in default for ``display[ing] a 
pattern of noncompliance with [the Chief ALJ's] orders'' and failing to 
defend his case. Id. at 2 (citing 21 CFR 1301.43(c)(3)). Accordingly, 
the Chief ALJ terminated the proceedings. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Termination Order notes that the Order for Prehearing 
Statements, Government's prehearing statement, and Order Directing 
Compliance were sent to the correct email address on file for 
Registrant's attorney. RFAAX 7, at 1, n.1. The Termination Order 
also notes that OALJ ``received no non-delivery notification when 
serving either the [Order for Prehearing Statements] or [Order 
Directing Compliance]'' on Registrant. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Registrant Is in Default

    DEA regulations provide that a registrant ``who has requested a 
hearing fails to plead . . . or otherwise defend'' his case, shall be 
deemed to be in default. 21 CFR 1301.43(c)(3). Unless excused, a 
default is deemed to constitute ``an admission of the factual 
allegations of the [OSC].'' 21 CFR 1301.43(e).
    The OSC notified Registrant that he would ``be deemed to have 
waived the right to a hearing and to be in default'' if he failed to 
plead or defend his case after requesting a hearing. RFAAX 1, at 2 
(citing 21 CFR 1301.43(c)(3)). The Chief ALJ's Order for Prehearing 
Statements and Order Directing Compliance also notified Registrant of 
the same. RFAAX 4, at 4; RFAAX 6, at 1.
    Registrant was provided with two opportunities to file a prehearing 
statement and was notified in the OSC, Order for Prehearing Statements, 
and Order Directing Compliance that a failure to defend his case would 
result in a finding of default and deemed admission of the OSC's 
factual allegations. RFAAX 1, at 2; RFAAX 4, at 4; RFAAX 6, at 1. And 
yet, Registrant failed to file a prehearing statement as ordered by the 
Chief ALJ in two separate orders. RFAAX 4; RFAAX 6.
    Accordingly, the Agency finds that the Chief ALJ did not err in 
finding

[[Page 61441]]

Registrant in default and terminating proceedings pursuant to 21 CFR 
1301.43(c)(3). RFAAX 7; see Hollywood Med. Rehab. Care, Inc., 90 FR 
47827, 47827-28 (2025) (affirming the ALJ's finding of default where 
the registrant failed to comply with multiple deadlines to file an 
answer); see also Robert L. Carter, D.D.S., 90 FR 9631, 9631-32 (2025) 
(collecting cases and affirming the ALJ's authority to find a waiver of 
the right to a hearing and terminate proceedings for noncompliance with 
filing deadlines); Mert Kivanc, D.O., 90 FR 48429, 48429 (2025) (same).
    The Agency further finds that Registrant is in default and, 
therefore, is deemed to have admitted to the factual allegations in the 
OSC. 21 CFR 1301.43(c)(3), (e), (f)(1).

III. Findings of Fact

    In light of Registrant's default, the factual allegations in the 
OSC are deemed admitted. 21 CFR 1301.43(e). Accordingly, the Agency 
finds, and Registrant is deemed to have admitted, that on June 11, 
2024, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of 
Indiana, Registrant pleaded guilty to one count of health care fraud, 
in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1347. RFAAX 1, at 2. Further, based on this 
conviction, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of 
Inspector General (HHS/OIG), mandatorily excluded Registrant from 
participation in Medicare, Medicaid, and all Federal health care 
programs pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1320a-7(a) for a minimum period of 12 
years, effective May 20, 2025. Id. Accordingly, the Agency finds 
substantial record evidence that Registrant has been mandatorily 
excluded from participation in Medicare, Medicaid, and all Federal 
health care programs pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1320a-7(a).

IV. Discussion

    Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(5), the Attorney General is authorized 
to suspend or revoke a registration upon finding that the registrant 
``has been excluded (or directed to be excluded) from participation in 
a program pursuant to section 1320a-7(a) of Title 42.'' The exclusion 
must be mandatory, rather than permissive, to constitute a basis for 
revocation under 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(5). Kansky J. Delisma, M.D., 85 FR 
23845, 23849 (2020). The underlying conviction forming the basis for 
mandatory exclusion from participation in federal health care programs 
need not involve controlled substances to provide the grounds for 
revocation pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(5). Moustafa M. Aboshady, M.D., 
90 FR 15992, 15993 n.5 (2025).
    The Government has the burden of proof in this proceeding, 21 CFR 
1301.44(e), and the Agency must make its findings based on 
``substantial [record] evidence.'' \4\ 5 U.S.C. 556(d); see 5 U.S.C. 
706(2); 21 U.S.C. 877. If the Government meets its burden of 
establishing a prima facie case that Registrant ``has been excluded (or 
directed to be excluded) from participation in a program pursuant to 
[42 U.S.C.] 1320a-7(a),'' 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(5), then the burden shifts 
to Registrant to demonstrate that he can be trusted with registration. 
Delisma, 85 FR at 23846, 23849, 23851.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ According to the CSA, ``[f]indings of fact by the [DEA 
Administrator], if supported by substantial evidence, shall be 
conclusive.'' 21 U.S.C. 877. Here, where Registrant is found to be 
in default, all the factual allegations in the OSC are deemed to be 
admitted. These uncontested and deemed admitted facts constitute 
evidence that exceeds the ``substantial evidence'' standard of 21 
U.S.C. 877.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Here, the Agency found above that HHS/OIG mandatorily excluded 
Registrant from participation in Medicare, Medicaid, and all Federal 
health care programs pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1320a-7(a). Accordingly, the 
Agency finds that the Government has established a prima facie case for 
revoking Registrant's registration under 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(5).

V. Sanction

    Where, as here, the Government has met its prima facie burden of 
showing that Registrant's registration should be revoked, the burden 
shifts to Registrant to show why he can be entrusted with a 
registration. Morall v. Drug Enf't Admin., 412 F.3d 165, 174 (D.C. Cir. 
2005); Jones Total Health Care Pharmacy, LLC v. Drug Enf't Admin., 881 
F.3d 823, 830 (11th Cir. 2018); Delisma, 85 FR at 23853. The issue of 
trust is necessarily a fact-dependent determination based on the 
circumstances presented by the individual registrant. Jones Total 
Health Care Pharmacy, 881 F.3d at 833; Jeffrey Stein, M.D., 84 FR 
46968, 46972 (2019). Moreover, as ``past performance is the best 
predictor of future performance,'' the Agency requires that a 
registrant who has committed acts inconsistent with the public interest 
accepts responsibility for those acts, understands the gravity and 
seriousness of the misconduct, and demonstrates that the registrant 
will not engage in future misconduct. ALRA Labs., Inc. v. Drug Enf't 
Admin., 54 F.3d 450, 452 (7th Cir. 1995); Jones Total Health Care 
Pharmacy, 881 F.3d at 831-33. The Agency requires a registrant's 
unequivocal acceptance of responsibility. Janet S. Pettyjohn, D.O., 89 
FR 82639, 82641 (2024); Mohammed Asgar, M.D., 83 FR 29569, 29573 
(2018); Jones Total Health Care Pharmacy, 881 F.3d at 830-31. In 
addition, a registrant's candor during the investigation and hearing, 
if one is requested, is an important factor in determining acceptance 
of responsibility and the appropriate sanction. Jones Total Health Care 
Pharmacy, 881 F.3d at 830-31; Hoxie v. Drug Enf't Admin., 419 F.3d 477, 
483-84 (6th Cir. 2005). Further, the Agency considers the egregiousness 
and extent of the misconduct as significant factors in determining the 
appropriate sanction. Jones Total Health Care Pharmacy, 881 F.3d at 834 
& n.4. The Agency also considers the need to deter similar acts by a 
registrant and by the community of registrants. Stein, 84 FR at 46972-
73.
    Here, although Registrant initially requested a hearing, he failed 
to ``plead . . . or otherwise defend'' and was deemed to be in default. 
21 CFR 1301.43(c)(3). To date, Registrant has not filed any motion to 
set aside the default with the Office of the Administrator. Id. Thus, 
Registrant has made no representations as to his future compliance with 
the CSA nor made any demonstration that he can be entrusted with 
registration. Moreover, the evidence presented by the Government shows 
that Registrant was convicted of charges related to defrauding health 
care benefits programs, further indicating that Registrant cannot be 
trusted with registration.
    Accordingly, the Agency will order that Registrant's 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. 
BF8869628, issued to Johann Farley, M.D. 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 Johann Farley, M.D., to renew 
or modify this registration, as well as any other pending application 
of Johann Farley, M.D., for additional registration in Indiana. This 
Order is effective October 29, 2026.

Signing Authority

    This document of the Drug Enforcement Administration was signed on 
September 21, 2026, by DEA 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

[[Page 61442]]

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. 2026-19821 Filed 9-28-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-P


</pre></body>
</html>
Indexed from Federal Register on September 29, 2026.

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.