STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, PETITIONER, Ve ; CASE NO. 2010-11590 DAVID MING PON, M.D., RESPONDENT. ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT Petitioner, Department of Health, by and through its undersigned counsel, files this Administrative Complaint before the. Board of Medicine against Respondent, David Ming Pon, M.D., and in support thereof alleges: 1. Petitioner is the state department charged with regulating the practice of medicine pursuant to Section 20.43, Florida Statutes; Chapter 456, Florida Statutes; and Chapter 458, Florida Statutes. 2. At all times material to this Complaint, Respondent was a licensed physician within the State of Florida, having been issued license “number ME 58295. 3. Respondent's address of record is 601 East Dixie Avenue, Suite 1003, Leesburg, Florida 34748. 4. At all times material to this Complaint, Respondent was Board certified in Ophthalmology. 5. At all times material to this Complaint, Respondent provided ophthalmologic care and treatment to patients E.S., J.W., and R.S. 6. At all times material to this Complaint, Respondent diagnosed patients E.S., J.W., and R.S. with wet macular degeneration. 7. Wet macular degeneration is caused by abnormal blood vessel growth in the eye, which leads to loss of vision from bleeding, leaking, and scarring. 8. Patients E.S., J.W., and R.S. did not provide subjective complaints such as significant vision reduction for a diagnosis of wet macular degeneration. ~ 9. Patients E.S., J.W., and R.S. did not exhibit objective findings - such as hemorrhages and exudates for a ‘diagnosis of wet macular degeneration. DOH v. David Ming Pon, M.D. Case Number 2010-11590 2 10. Fluorescein angiograms of patients E.S., J.W., and R.S. did not reveal sub-retinal neovascularization for a diagnosis of wet macular degeneration. 11. Respondent treated patients ES., J.W., and RS. for Respondent's diagnoses of wet macular degeneration with micro pulse laser, at a frequency of 810 nm. 12. The standard of care required that Respondent perform . complete histories and physical examinations of patients E.S., J.W., and R.S., and obtain test results showing sub-retinal neovascularization, in order to make evidence based diagnoses of wet macular degeneration, and not treat patients E.S., J.W., and R.S. with micro pulse laser as provided. FACTS SPECIFIC TO PT. E.S. 13. Respondent provided care and treatment to patient E.S. from on or about June 8, 2006, to on or about September 1, 2009. 7 14. Beginning on or about June 15, 2006, and continuing until on or about August 11, 2009, Respondent treated patient E.S. with laser photocoagulation for Respondent's diagnosis of wet macular degeneration. DOH v. David Ming Pon, M.D. Case Number 2010-11590 3 COUNT I — PT. E.S, 15. Petitioner re-alleges paragraphs one (1) through fourteen (14) as if fully set forth herein. . | 16. Section 458.331(1)(t), Florida Statutes (2007-2009), provides that committing medical malpractice as defined in Section 456.50, Florida Statutes, constitutes grounds for disciplinary action by the Board of Medicine. The Board shall give great weight to the provisions of Section 766.102, Florida Statutes, when enforcing Section 458.331(1)(1, Florida - Statutes. Medical Malpractice is defined in Section 456.50, Florida Statutes, as the failure to practice medicine in accordance with the level of care, skill, and treatment recognized in general law related to health care licensure. Section 766.102, Florida Statutes, provides that the prevailing professional standard of care for a given health care provider shall be that level of care, skill, and treatment which, in light of all relevant surrounding circumstances, is recognized as acceptable and appropriate by reasonably prudent similar health care providers. 17. Respondent failed to practice medicine with that level of care, skill and treatment which, in light of all relevant surrounding circumstances, is recognized as acceptable and appropriate by reasonably DOH v. David Ming Pon, M.D. Case Number 2010-11590 4 _ prudent similar health care providers in violation of Section 458.331(1)(t), Florida Statutes (2007-2009), in the care and treatment of patient E.S. in one or more of the following ways: a. By diagnosing wet macular degeneration without subjective complaints for the diagnosis; b. By. diagnosing wet macular | degeneration without — objective findings for the diagnosis; Cc. By treating patient E.S. for wet macular degeneration without medical justification; d. By ordering unwarranted tests; and/or e. By treating patient E.S. with micro pulse laser as provided without medical justification. i8. Based on the foregoing, Respondent has violated Section 458.331(1)(0), Florida Statutes (2007-2009), by committing medical malpractice. COUNT Il — PT. E.S. 19. Petitioner re-alleges and incorporates paragraphs one (1) through fourteen (14) as if fully set forth herein. DOH v. David Ming Pon, M.D. Case Number 2010-11590 ; 5 20. Section 458.331(1)(m), Florida Statutes (2007-2009), subjects a licensee to discipline for failing to keep legible, as defined by department rule in consultation with the board, medical records that identify the ‘licensed physician or the physician extender and supervising physician by name and_ professional title who is or are responsible for rendering, ordering, supervising, or billing for each diagnostic or treatment procedure and that justify the course of treatment of the patient, including, but not limited to, patient histories; examination results; test results; records of drugs prescribed, dispensed, or administered; and reports of consultations and hospitalizations. 21. On or about the date set forth above, Respondent failed to keep medical records that justified the course of treatment of patient E.S. | in one or more of the following ways: | a. By failing to document a complete medical history; b. By failing to document adequate physical examinations; OG By failing to document sufficient test results for a diagnosis of wet macular degeneration; and/or d. By failing to document sufficient findings to justify the diagnosis and treatment provided to patient E.S. DOH v. David Ming Pon, M.D. Case Number 2010-11590 6 22. Based on the foregoing, Respondent violated Section 458.331(1)(m), Florida Statutes (2007-2009), by failing to keep medical records that justified the course of treatment of patient E.S. COUNT It — PT. E.S. 23. Petitioner re-alleges paragraphs one (1) through fourteen (14) as if fully set forth herein. | 24. Section 458.331(1)(n), Florida Statutes (2007-2009), subjects a licensee to discipline for exercising influence on the patient or client in such a manner as to exploit the patient or client for financial gain of the licensee or of a third party, which shall include, but not be limited to, the promoting or selling of services, goods, appliances, or drugs. 25. Respondent exercised influence on patient E.S. by diagnosing E.S. with wet macular degeneration in the absence of subjective complaints and/or objective findings, and exploited patient E.S. for financial gain by providing and billing for medical services including fluorescein angiography and micro pulse laser treatment for the diagnosis of wet macular degeneration. DOH v. David Ming Pon, M.D. : Case Number 2010-11590 7 26. Based on the foregoing, Respondent violated Section 458.331(1)(n), Florida Statutes (2007-2009), in his care and treatment of patient E.S. FACTS SPECIFIC TO PT. J.W. 27. Respondent provided care and treatment to patient J.W. from on or about March 26, 2008 to on or about November 17, 2009. 28. Beginning on or about August 17, 2008, and continuing until on or about November 17, . 2009, Respondent treated patient J.W. with laser photocoagulation for Respondent's diagnosis of wet macular degeneration. COUNT IV — PT. 1.W. 29. Petitioner re-alleges paragraphs one (1) through fourteen (14) and twenty-seven (27) through twenty-eight (28) as if fully set forth herein. . : 30. Section 458.331(1)(t), Florida Statutes (2007-2009), provides that committing medical malpractice as defined in Section 456.50, Florida Statutes, constitutes grounds for disciplinary action by ‘the Board of — Medicine. The Board shall. give great weight to the provisions of Section 766.102, Florida Statutes, when enforcing Section 458.331(1)(t), Florida DOH v. David Ming Pon, M.D. Case Number 2010-11590 . 8 Statutes. Medical Malpractice is defined in Section 456.50, Florida Statutes, as the failure to practice medicine in accordance with the level of care, skill, and treatment recognized in general law related to health care licensure. Section 766.102, Florida Statutes, provides that the prevailing professional standard of care for a given health care provider shall be that level of care, skill, and treatment which, in light of all relevant surrounding circumstances, is recognized as acceptable and appropriate by reasonably prudent similar health care providers. | 31. Respondent failed to practice medicine with that level of care, skill and treatment which, in light of all relevant surrounding circumstances, is recognized as acceptable and appropriate by reasonably prudent similar health care providers in violation of Section 458.331(1)(0, Florida Statutes (2007-2009), in the care and treatment of patient J.W. in one or more of the following ways: - a. By diagnosing wet macular degeneration without subjective complaints for the diagnosis; b. By diagnosing wet macular degeneration without _ objective findings for the diagnosis; DOH v. David Ming Pon, M.D. . Case Number 2010-11590 . 9 C. By treating patient J.W. for wet macular degeneration without medical justification; d. _ By ordering unwarranted tests; and/or e. By treating patient J.W. with micro pulse laser as provided without medical justification. 32. Based on the foregoing, Respondent has violated Section 458.331(1)(t), Florida Statutes (2007-2009), by committing medical maipractice. | COUNT V — PT. 3.W. 33. Petitioner re-alleges paragraphs one (1) through fourteen (14) and twenty-seven (27) through twenty-eight (28) as if fully set forth herein. . . 34. Section 458.331(1)(m), Florida Statutes (2007-2009), subjects a licensee to discipline for failing to keep legible, as defined by department rule in consultation with the board, medical records that identify the licensed physician or the physician extender and supervising physician by name and professional title who is or are responsible for rendering, ordering, supervising, or billing for each diagnostic or treatment procedure and that justify the course of treatment of the patient, including, but not DOH v. David Ming Pon, M.D. : . Case Number 2010-11590 10 limited to, patient histories; examination results; test results; records of drugs prescribed, dispensed, or administered; and reports of consultations and hospitalizations. 35. On or about the date set forth above, Respondent failed to keep medical records that justified the course of treatment of patient J.W. in one or more of the following ways: a. By failing to document a complete medical history; b. By failing to document adequate physical examinations; c. By failing to document sufficient test results for a diagnosis of wet macular degeneration; and/or d. By failing to document sufficient findings to justify the | diagnosis and treatment provided to patient J.W. 36. Based on the foregoing, Respondent violated Section 458.331(1\(m), Florida Statutes (2007-2009), by failing to keep medical records that justified the course of treatment of patient J.W. COUNT VI — PT. J.W: 37. Petitioner re-alleges paragraphs one (1) through fourteen (14) and twenty-seven (27) through twenty-eight (28) as if fully set forth herein. DOH v. David Ming Pon, M.D. Case Number 2010-11590 1 38. Section 458.331(1)(n), Florida Statutes (2007-2009), subjects a licensee to discipline for exercising influence on the patient or client in such a manner as to exploit the patient or client for financial gain of the licensee or of a third party, which shall include, but not be limited to, the promoting or selling of services, goods, appliances, or drugs. 39. Respondent exercised influence on patient J. W. by diagnosing j.W. with wet macular degeneration in the absence of subjective complaints and/or objective findings, and exploited patient J.W. for financial gain by providing and billing for medical services including fluorescein angiography and micro pulse laser treatment for the diagnosis of wet macular degeneration. 40. Based on the foregoing, Respondent violated Section 458.331(1)(n), Florida Statutes (2007-2009), in his care and treatment of patient J.W. - FACTS SPECIFIC TO PT. R.S. 41. Respondent provided care and treatment to patient R.S. from on or about December 21, 2006 to on or about April 17, 2009. DOH v. David Ming Pon, M.D. Case Number 2010-11590 12 42. Beginning on or about December 22, 2006, and continuing until! on or about April 6, 2009, Respondent treated patient R.S. with laser photocoagulation for Respondent's diagnosis of wet macular degeneration. COUNT VII — PT. R.S. 43. Petitioner re-alleges paragraphs one (1) through fourteen (14) and forty-one (41) through forty-two (42) as if fully set forth herein. 44. Section 458.331(1)(t), Florida Statutes (2007-2009), provides that committing medical malpractice as defined in Section 456.50, Florida Statutes, constitutes grounds for disciplinary action by the ‘Board of Medicine. The Board shall give great weight to the provisions of Section 766.102, Florida Statutes, when enforcing Section 458.331(1)(0), Florida — Statutes. Medical Malpractice is defined in Section 456.50, Florida Statutes, as the failure to practice medicine in accordance with the level of care, skill, and treatment recognized in general law related to health care licensure. Section 766.102, Florida Statutes, provides that the prevailing professional standard of care for a given health care provider shall be that level of care, skill, and treatment which, in light of al relevant surrounding = circumstances, is recognized as acceptable and appropriate by reasonably prudent similar health caré providers. DOH v. David Ming Pon, M.D. Case Number 2010-11590 : 13 45. Respondent failed to practice medicine with that level of care, skill and treatment which, in light of ail relevant surrounding circumstances, is recognized as acceptable and appropriate by reasonably prudent similar health care providers in violation of Section 458.331(1)(t), Florida Statutes (2007-2009), in the care and treatment of patient R.S. in one or more of the following ways: a. By. diagnosing wet macular degeneration without subjective complaints for the diagnosis; | b. By diagnosing. wet macular degeneration without objective findings for the diagnosis; c. By treating patient R.S. for wet macular degeneration without medical justification; d. By ordering unwarranted tests; and/or . e. _ By treating patient R.S. with micro pulse laser as provided without medical justification. 46. Based on the foregoing, Respondent has violated Section 458.331(1)(t), Florida Statutes (2007-2009), by committing medical malpractice. DOH v, David Ming Pon, M.D. Case Number 2010-11590 14 COUNT VITI — PT. R.S, 47. Petitioner re-alleges paragraphs one (1) through fourteen (14) and forty-one (41) through forty-two (42) as if fully set forth herein. 48. Section 458.331(1)(m), Florida Statutes (2007-2009), subjects — a licensee to discipline for failing to keep legible, as defined by department rule in consultation with the board, medical records that identify the licensed physician or the physician extender and supervising physician by name and professional title who is or are responsible for rendering, ordering, supervising, or billing for each diagnostic or treatment procedure | and that justify the course of treatment of the patient, including, but not limited to, patient histories; examination results; test results; records of drugs prescribed, dispensed, or administered; and reports of consultations and hospitalizations. | . 49, On or about the date set forth above, Respondent failed to keep medical records that justified the course of treatment of patient R.S. in one or more of the following ways: a. _ By failing to document a complete medical history; b. By failing to document adequate physical examinations; "DOH v. David Ming Pon, M.D. Case Number 2010-11590 15 c. By failing to document sufficient test results for a . diagnosis of wet macular degeneration; and/or d. By failing to document sufficient findings to justify the diagnosis and treatment provided to patient R.S. 50. Based on the foregoing, Respondent violated Section 458,331(1)(m), Florida Statutes (2007-2009), by failing to keep medical ‘records that justified the course of treatment of patient R.S. COUNT IX — PT. R.S. | 51. Petitioner re-alleges paragraphs one (1) through fourteen (14) and forty-one (41) through forty-two (42) as if fully set forth herein. 52. Section 458.331(1)(n), Florida Statutes (2007-2009), subjects a licensee to discipline for exercising influence on the patient or client in such a manner as to exploit the patient or client for financial gain of the licensee or of a third party, which shail include, but not be limited to, the promoting or selling of services, goods, appliances, or drugs. 53. Respondent exercised influence on patient R.S. by diagnosing R.S. with wet macular degeneration in the absence of subjective complaints and/or objective findings, and exploited patient R.S. for financial gain by providing and billing for medical services including DOH v. David Ming Pon, M.D. Case Number 2010-11590 16 fluorescein angiography and micro pulse laser treatment for the diagnosis of wet macular degeneration. 54. Based on the foregoing, Respondent violated Section 458.331(1)(n), Florida Statutes (2007-2009), in his care and treatment of patient R.S. . WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests that the Board of Medicine enter an order imposing one or more of the following penalties: permanent revocation or suspension of Respondent's license, restriction of practice, imposition of an administrative fine, issuance of a reprimand, placement of the Respondent on probation, corrective action, refund of fees billed or collected, remedial education and/or any other relief that the Board deems appropriate. [Signatures are on the following page.] BOH v. David Ming Pon, M.D. Case Number 2010-11590 17 SIGNED this /5 day of _/|Leeuti _, 2013. FILED DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH DEPUTY CLERK cierk: Bridget Cocter DATE: SA~/o-1Aa JBF/ks PCP Date: December 13, 2013 John H. Armstrong, MD, FACS Surgeon General & Secretary ? Fricke, Jr. ant General Counsel DOH Prosecution Services Unit 4052 Bald Cypress Way, Bin C-65 Tallahassee, FL 32399-3265 - Florida Bar No.: 0901910 (850) 245-4444 Business (850) 245-4684 Facsimile john. frickejr@flhealth.gov PCP Members: Dr. Ashkar, Dr. Lage, and Ms. Tootle DOH v. David Ming Pon, M.D. Case Number 2010-11590 18

Docket for Case No: 14-002208PL