On February 18, 2026, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA or Government) issued an Order to Show Cause (OSC) to Stephen Bossenberry, M.D., of Grand Blanc, Michigan (Registrant). Request for Final Agency Action (RFAA), Exhibit (RFAAX) 1, at 1, 3. The OSC proposed the revocation of Registrant's Certificate of Registration No. FB7239393, alleging that Registrant's registration should be revoked because Registrant is “currently without authority to prescribe, administer, dispense, or otherwise handle controlled substances in the State of Michigan, the state in which [he is] registered with DEA.” Id. at 2. (citing 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3)).^[1]

The OSC notified Registrant of his right to file a written request for hearing, and that if he failed to file such a request, he would be deemed to have waived his right to a hearing and be in default. Id. (citing 21 CFR 1301.43). Here, Registrant did not request a hearing, and the Agency finds him to be in default. RFAA, at 2.^[2] “A default, unless excused, shall be deemed to constitute a waiver of the registrant's/applicant's right to a hearing and an ( printed page 57164) admission of the factual allegations of the [OSC].” 21 CFR 1301.43(e).

Further, “[i]n the event that a registrant . . . is deemed to be in default . . . DEA may then file a request for final agency action with the Administrator, along with a record to support its request. In such circumstances, the Administrator may enter a default final order pursuant to [21 CFR] 1316.67.” Id. at 1301.43(f)(1). Here, the Government has requested final agency action based on Registrant's default pursuant to 21 CFR 1301.43(c), (f), 1301.46. RFAA, at 1; see also21 CFR 1316.67.

Findings of Fact

The Agency finds that, in light of Registrant's default, the factual allegations in the OSC are deemed admitted. According to the OSC, on December 20, 2025, both Registrant's Michigan medical license and Michigan controlled substance license expired by their own terms. RFAAX 1, at 2. According to Michigan online records, of which the Agency takes official notice,^[3] both Registrant's Michigan medical license and Michigan controlled substance license remain expired. State of Michigan Licensing & Regulatory Affairs Professional Licensing Search, aca-prod.accela.com/​MILARA/​GeneralProperty/​PropertyLookUp.aspx (last visited date of signature of this Order). Accordingly, the Agency finds that Registrant is not licensed to practice medicine nor to handle controlled substances in Michigan, the state in which he is registered with DEA.^[4]

Discussion

Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3), the Attorney General is authorized to suspend or revoke a registration issued under 21 U.S.C. 823 “upon a finding that the registrant . . . has had his State license or registration suspended . . . [or] revoked . . . by competent State authority and is no longer authorized by State law to engage in the . . . dispensing of controlled substances.” With respect to a practitioner, DEA has also long held that the possession of authority to dispense controlled substances under the laws of the state in which a practitioner engages in professional practice is a fundamental condition for obtaining and maintaining a practitioner's registration. Gonzales v. Oregon, 546 U.S. 243, 270 (2006) (“The Attorney General can register a physician to dispense controlled substances `if the applicant is authorized to dispense . . . controlled substances under the laws of the State in which he practices.' . . . The very definition of a `practitioner' eligible to prescribe includes physicians `licensed, registered, or otherwise permitted, by the United States or the jurisdiction in which he practices' to dispense controlled substances. 802(21).”). The Agency has applied these principles consistently. See, e.g., Lawrence Rudolph, D.M.D.,89 FR 79310 (2024); Henry-Norbert O. Ndekwe, M.D.,90 FR 15990 (2025); Benson Sergiles, P.A.,90 FR 32016 (2025).^[5]

According to Michigan law, “a person who manufactures, distributes, prescribes, or dispenses a controlled substance in this state or who proposes to engage in the manufacture, distribution, prescribing, or dispensing of a controlled substance in this state shall obtain a license issued by the [Michigan Board of Pharmacy] in accordance with the rules.” Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.7303(1) (2025).

Here, the undisputed evidence in the record is that Registrant lacks authority to handle controlled substances in Michigan because his Michigan controlled substance license is expired. As discussed above, an individual must hold a Michigan controlled substance license to dispense controlled substances in Michigan. Thus, because Registrant lacks authority handle controlled substances in Michigan, Registrant is not eligible to maintain a DEA registration. Accordingly, the Agency will order that Registrant's DEA 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. FB7239393 issued to Stephen Bossenberry, 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 Stephen Bossenberry, M.D., to renew or modify this registration, as well as any other pending application of Stephen Bossenberry, M.D., for additional registration in Michigan. This Order is effective October 8, 2026.

Signing Authority

This document of the Drug Enforcement Administration was signed on August 31, 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 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 .