Vote STATE OF FLORIDA rhe Py DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, Petitioner, Vs. | | CASE'NO. 00-6003 OO-SIOL PET MED EXPRESS Respondent. / AD TIVE COMPLAINT COMES NOW the Petitioner, Department of Health, and files this Administrative Complaint before the Board of Pharmacy against the Respondent, PET MED EXPRESS and in support thereof would state: - 1. Petitioner is the state agency charged with regulating the practice of Pharmacy pursuant to Section 20.43, Florida Statutes; Chapter 456, (formerly Chapter 455, Part II; see Chapter 2000-160, Laws of Florida), and Chapter 465, Florida Statutes. Pursuant to Section 20.43(3)(g), Florida Statutes, the Department has contracted with the Agency for Health Care Administration to provide consumer complaint, investigative, and prosecutorial services required by the Division of Medical Quality Assurance, councils, or boards. 2. Respondent has been at all times pertinent hereto, a duly licensed pharmacy . pursuant to Chapter 465, Florida Statutes, having been issued license number PH 0014144. 3. Respondent's last known address is 1441 S.W. 29 Avenue, Pompano Beach, Florida 33069. . 0002 6 2 199 4. On or about May 1, 2000 an investigation was performed by agents of the © ’ Petitioner. As a result, it was discovered that in February 2000 the Respondent dispensed Heartgaurd to A.H. for her pet without a prescription. 5. In addition, on March 3, 2000 the investigator requested copies of the daily printout for prescriptions filled and began making telephone calls regarding the verification of prescriptions. Four of the six persons contacted denied ever providing authorization to Pet Med Express, or ever having received the call. Another individual stated the person who supposedly verified the prescription was not working on the day of the verification. ae ‘6. On March 8, 2000 printouts of verified prescriptions were obtained and checked by the investigator, there were three instances that there were no calls made to the veterinarians for verification of a prescription. 7. Based on the foregoing, Respondent's license to practice pharmacy in the State of Florida is subject to discipline pursuant to Section 465.016(1)(e), Florida Statues, to wit: Section 465.023(1)c), Florida Statutes, and Rule 465.015(2)(c), Florida Statutes, by ‘dispensing medication without a valid prescription. WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests the Board of Pharmacy toenteran | Order imposing one or more of the following penalties: revocation or suspension of the respondent's license, restriction of the Respondent's practice, imposition of an administrative fine and assessment of costs related to investigation and prosecution of this case (including, but not limited to costs associated with attomey time), issuance of a teprimand, placement of the Respondent on probation, and/or any other relief the Board deems appropriate. C ff somite Dube 42 Robert G. Brooks, M.D. Secretary, Department of Health . By: Nancy M. Snurkows Chief Attorney On Behalf of the Agency for Health Care Administration DEPARTMENT OF HEAL DFPuTY cue tt CLERK Ubi &. re fen DATE__/o /30/2> 06 COUNSEL FOR AGENCY: Michael P. Sasso, ju PA” - Senior Attomey : Florida Bar No. 0167363 Agency for Health Care Administration General Counsel's Office - MQA Practitioner Regulation P.O. Box 14229 Tallahassee, Florida 32317-4229 (850) 487-9670 4 + POP aM /CS PCP DATE: j0-10 -00

Docket for Case No: 00-005132