STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, Petitioner, vs. ; CASE NO. 00-02192 PET MED EXPRESS, O!l-DIW4 Respondent. / ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT COMES NOW, the Petitioner, Department of Health, and files this Administrative Complaint before the Board of Pharmacy, against the Respondent, GORDON GYOR, R-PH,, 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 2000-160, Florida Statutes; and Chapter 465, Florida Statutes. 2. Effective July 1, 1997, Petitioner is the state agency charged with regulating the practice of pharmacy pursuant to Section 20.43, Florida Statutes, Chapter 456, Florida Statutes, (formerly Chapter 455, Part II; see Chapter 2000-160, Laws of “Florida), 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, as appropriate. | 3. 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. 4. The Respondent's last known address is 1441 S.W. 29° Avenue, Pompano Beach, Florida 33069. 5. On March 15, 2000 this agency received a complaint that the Respondent had filled a veterinary related prescription without first verifying the prescription with the veterinarian. 6. During the month of February of 2000, the client of a veterinary named Tracy W. Land, D.V.M., was contacted by a client to ask for the dosage of Droncit, a medication that had not been stocked by the veterinarian for over three (3) years. The client was told that the drug in question was no longer recommended. At the time the client indicated that he had obtained a new prescription for the medication from Pet Med Express and the label contained her name, The veterinarian denies that the prescription was issued or authorized. i 7. Shortly thereafter the complaining veterinarian had one of her technicians order the same medication over the internet. The confirmation was immediately sent but the individual who ordered the medication was told it would not be shipped until verified and approved by the veterinarian in question. 8. Shortly after the medication in question was ordered via the internet it was shipped to and received by the veterinarian’s technician. No written or telephonic | authorization was ever issued by the veterinarian whose name appears on the label. 9. The conduct of the Respondent as aforesaid is contrary to the provisions contained in Section 465.015(2\(), Florida Statutes, for dispensing pharmaceuticals without a valid prescription. WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfilly requests the Board of Pharmacy to enter an Order imposing one or more of the penalties proscribed by law, together with any other and further relief deemed just under the circumstances. SIGNED this| day of { blo , 2000. Robert G. Brooks, M.D. Secretary, Department of Health —_— By: Nancy M. Snurko Chief Attorney On Behalf of the Agency for Health Care Administration COUNSEL FOR AGHNCY: Lawrence F. Kranert, Jr. Fl L Senior Attorney DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Florida Bar No. 0171 eb, CLERK Agency for Health Care Administration cLerk Whi fh. fe07 General Counsel's Office - MQA heh R fe ° Allied Health DATE lof defp roe? P.O. Box 14229 Tallahassee, Florida 32317-4229 (850)487-2225 07/13/00 PoP: OM / BS Deo Y-1Q-O 8

Docket for Case No: 01-000167