On January 13, 2026, the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) announced that Atlantic Biologicals Corporation, a Miami-based pharmaceutical distributor, paid a $450,000 criminal penalty and entered into a two-year deferred prosecution agreement. The settlement resolves the government’s allegations that from 2017 through May 2023, the company, through its business unit NAS, engaged in
I know it can be said about many areas of the law; however, the statue, regulations, and administrative caselaw governing controlled substances is truly a different animal. I frequently get calls from attorneys seeking advice on matters involving Drug Enforcement Administration investigations. Many have little to no experience with such matters. My first (and perhaps
(If this song is stuck in your head all day long, you are welcome.)
As my loyal readers are aware (too Bridgerton?), customer due diligence obligations, especially for distributors and manufacturers, have significantly evolved over the past several years. When I joined the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) nearly two decades ago (back when registrants
Today, the Drug Enforcement Administration announced the revocation of Coconut Grove Pharmacy’s DEA registration.
DEA issued an Order to Show Cause and Immediate Suspension of Registration back in September 2022, premised on Coconut Grove’s alleged failure to identify, resolve, and document the resolution of potential red flags associated with prescriptions for controlled substances. If
The DEA issued a short press release yesterday that, at first glance, appeared to deliver on something that wholesale drug distributors have been seeking for years—access to ARCOS data so that wholesalers can see the total number of controlled substances a customer is ordering.* Despite the sensational headline, the new DEA tool is underwhelming and misses the mark because it will only tell a wholesaler how many other wholesalers a prospective customer has purchased a controlled substance from in the past six months. Unfortunately, this tool will provide little to no usefulness to distributors in identifying suspicious orders.
On November 10, 2016, the DEA issued its final decision and order in the case against Jones Total Health Care Pharmacy, L.L.C. (“Jones Pharmacy”) and SND Health Care L.L.C. (“SND”). The
Administrator ordered that the DEA deny Jones Pharmacy’s registration renewal application and also deny SND’s pending registration application. These orders were consistent with the
In the Matter of the Medicine Shoppe (October 2, 2014)
DEA recently revoked the registration of the Medicine Shoppe, a San Antonio, Texas, pharmacy, based on a finding that the pharmacy violated the Controlled Substances Act in all of the following ways:
At the 110th Annual Meeting of the National Association of Boards of Pharmacy (“NABP”) a new educational video entitled “Red Flags” was released by NABP to assist pharmacists in properly exercising their corresponding responsibility and identifying the warning signs of prescription drug abuse and diversion. The educational video was sponsored by Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals, Cardinal Health,
In the Matter of Clair L. Pettinger, M.D. (October 3, 2013)
On nine occasions between November 10, 2011 and May 9, 2012, Clair L. Pettinger, M.D. issued prescriptions for controlled substances to undercover law enforcement agents. During these visits Dr. Pettinger failed to conduct sufficient medical examinations, failed to make diagnoses of the medical conditions
Corresponding responsibility is perhaps one of the most commonly misunderstood and/or (unfortunately) unknown concepts found in DEA’s regulations. And yet, enforcement actions against pharmacies are most frequently initiated when a pharmacist fails to exercise his/her corresponding responsibility. I have had countless conversations with practicing pharmacists who are either unfamiliar with the concept of a “corresponding responsibility” or don’t understand how to apply it in their daily practice. The DEA’s regulations (21 C.F.R. § 1306.04) addressing corresponding responsibility state A prescription for a controlled substance to be effective must be issued for a legitimate medical purpose by an individual practitioner acting in the usual course of his professional practice. The responsibility for the proper prescribing and dispensing of controlled substances is upon the prescribing practitioner, but a corresponding responsibility rests with the pharmacist who fills the prescription. An order purporting to be a prescription issued not in the usual course of professional treatment or in legitimate and authorized research is not a prescription within the meaning and intent of section 309 of the Act (21 U.S.C. 829) and the person knowingly filling such a purported prescription, as well as the person issuing it, shall be subject to the penalties provided for violations of the provisions of law relating to controlled substances.