On August 29, 2025, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA or Government) issued an Order to Show Cause (OSC) to Johann Farley, M.D., of Merrillville, Indiana (Registrant). Request for Final Agency Action (RFAA), Exhibit (RFAAX) 1, at 1, 3. The OSC proposed the revocation of Registrant's DEA registration, No. BF8869628,^[1] alleging that he has been mandatorily excluded “from participation in Medicare, Medicaid, and all Federal health care programs pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1320a-7(a).” Id. at 1 (citing 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(5)).

On August 10, 2026, the Government submitted an RFAA to the Administrator requesting that the Agency ^[2] issue a default final order revoking Registrant's registration. RFAA, at 1, 4. After carefully reviewing the entire record and conducting the analysis as set forth in detail below, the Agency grants the Government's RFAA and revokes Registrant's registration.

I. Procedural History

On August 29, 2025, a DEA Diversion Investigator personally served the OSC on Registrant and sent an electronic copy of the OSC to his registered email address. RFAAX 2, at 1-2. On September 26, 2025, Registrant, through counsel, submitted a timely hearing request and answer to the Office of Administrative Law Judges. RFAAX 3. The matter was assigned to an administrative law judge, and on April 29, 2026, the Chief Administrative Law Judge (Chief ALJ) issued an Order for Prehearing Statements, ordering the Government to file a prehearing statement by May 13, 2026, and Registrant to file a prehearing statement by May 27, 2026. RFAAX 4, at 2, 4.

The Government timely filed its prehearing statement on May 12, 2026. RFAAX 5. On June 3, 2026, the Chief ALJ issued an Order Directing Compliance, noting that Registrant had not filed a prehearing statement by the initial May 27 deadline, and providing Registrant with a second opportunity to file a prehearing statement by June 8, 2026. RFAAX 6, at 1.

On the same day, Registrant sent an email to OALJ stating that the Order Directing Compliance was the “ `first notification' ” he had received in this matter, after which the Government forwarded its prehearing statement to Registrant. RFAAX 7, at 1, n.1. On June 9, 2026, the Chief ALJ issued an Order Finding [Registrant] in Default and Terminating Proceedings (Termination Order), finding that Registrant failed for the second time to file a prehearing statement.^[3] RFAAX 7. The Chief ALJ further found Registrant in default for “display[ing] a pattern of noncompliance with [the Chief ALJ's] orders” and failing to defend his case. Id. at 2 (citing 21 CFR 1301.43(c)(3)). Accordingly, the Chief ALJ terminated the proceedings. Id.

II. Registrant Is in Default

DEA regulations provide that a registrant “who has requested a hearing fails to plead . . . or otherwise defend” his case, shall be deemed to be in default. 21 CFR 1301.43(c)(3). Unless excused, a default is deemed to constitute “an admission of the factual allegations of the [OSC].” 21 CFR 1301.43(e).

The OSC notified Registrant that he would “be deemed to have waived the right to a hearing and to be in default” if he failed to plead or defend his case after requesting a hearing. RFAAX 1, at 2 (citing 21 CFR 1301.43(c)(3)). The Chief ALJ's Order for Prehearing Statements and Order Directing Compliance also notified Registrant of the same. RFAAX 4, at 4; RFAAX 6, at 1.

Registrant was provided with two opportunities to file a prehearing statement and was notified in the OSC, Order for Prehearing Statements, and Order Directing Compliance that a failure to defend his case would result in a finding of default and deemed admission of the OSC's factual allegations. RFAAX 1, at 2; RFAAX 4, at 4; RFAAX 6, at 1. And yet, Registrant failed to file a prehearing statement as ordered by the Chief ALJ in two separate orders. RFAAX 4; RFAAX 6.

Accordingly, the Agency finds that the Chief ALJ did not err in finding ( printed page 61441) Registrant in default and terminating proceedings pursuant to 21 CFR 1301.43(c)(3). RFAAX 7; see Hollywood Med. Rehab. Care, Inc.,90 FR 47827, 47827-28 (2025) (affirming the ALJ's finding of default where the registrant failed to comply with multiple deadlines to file an answer); see also Robert L. Carter, D.D.S.,90 FR 9631, 9631-32 (2025) (collecting cases and affirming the ALJ's authority to find a waiver of the right to a hearing and terminate proceedings for noncompliance with filing deadlines); Mert Kivanc, D.O.,90 FR 48429, 48429 (2025) (same).

The Agency further finds that Registrant is in default and, therefore, is deemed to have admitted to the factual allegations in the OSC. 21 CFR 1301.43(c)(3), (e), (f)(1).

III. Findings of Fact

In light of Registrant's default, the factual allegations in the OSC are deemed admitted. 21 CFR 1301.43(e). Accordingly, the Agency finds, and Registrant is deemed to have admitted, that on June 11, 2024, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, Registrant pleaded guilty to one count of health care fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1347. RFAAX 1, at 2. Further, based on this conviction, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector General (HHS/OIG), mandatorily excluded Registrant from participation in Medicare, Medicaid, and all Federal health care programs pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1320a-7(a) for a minimum period of 12 years, effective May 20, 2025. Id. Accordingly, the Agency finds substantial record evidence that Registrant has been mandatorily excluded from participation in Medicare, Medicaid, and all Federal health care programs pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1320a-7(a).

IV. Discussion

Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(5), the Attorney General is authorized to suspend or revoke a registration upon finding that the registrant “has been excluded (or directed to be excluded) from participation in a program pursuant to section 1320a-7(a) of Title 42.” The exclusion must be mandatory, rather than permissive, to constitute a basis for revocation under 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(5). Kansky J. Delisma, M.D.,85 FR 23845, 23849 (2020). The underlying conviction forming the basis for mandatory exclusion from participation in federal health care programs need not involve controlled substances to provide the grounds for revocation pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(5). Moustafa M. Aboshady, M.D.,90 FR 15992, 15993 n.5 (2025).

The Government has the burden of proof in this proceeding, 21 CFR 1301.44(e), and the Agency must make its findings based on “substantial [record] evidence.” ^[4] 5 U.S.C. 556(d); see5 U.S.C. 706(2); 21 U.S.C. 877. If the Government meets its burden of establishing a prima facie case that Registrant “has been excluded (or directed to be excluded) from participation in a program pursuant to [42 U.S.C.] 1320a-7(a),” 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(5), then the burden shifts to Registrant to demonstrate that he can be trusted with registration. Delisma, 85 FR at 23846, 23849, 23851.

Here, the Agency found above that HHS/OIG mandatorily excluded Registrant from participation in Medicare, Medicaid, and all Federal health care programs pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1320a-7(a). Accordingly, the Agency finds that the Government has established a prima facie case for revoking Registrant's registration under 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(5).

V. Sanction

Where, as here, the Government has met its prima facie burden of showing that Registrant's registration should be revoked, the burden shifts to Registrant to show why he can be entrusted with a registration. Morall v. Drug Enf't Admin., 412 F.3d 165, 174 (D.C. Cir. 2005); Jones Total Health Care Pharmacy, LLC v. Drug Enf't Admin., 881 F.3d 823, 830 (11th Cir. 2018); Delisma, 85 FR at 23853. The issue of trust is necessarily a fact-dependent determination based on the circumstances presented by the individual registrant. Jones Total Health Care Pharmacy, 881 F.3d at 833; Jeffrey Stein, M.D.,84 FR 46968, 46972 (2019). Moreover, as “past performance is the best predictor of future performance,” the Agency requires that a registrant who has committed acts inconsistent with the public interest accepts responsibility for those acts, understands the gravity and seriousness of the misconduct, and demonstrates that the registrant will not engage in future misconduct. ALRA Labs., Inc. v. Drug Enf't Admin., 54 F.3d 450, 452 (7th Cir. 1995); Jones Total Health Care Pharmacy, 881 F.3d at 831-33. The Agency requires a registrant's unequivocal acceptance of responsibility. Janet S. Pettyjohn, D.O.,89 FR 82639, 82641 (2024); Mohammed Asgar, M.D.,83 FR 29569, 29573 (2018); Jones Total Health Care Pharmacy, 881 F.3d at 830-31. In addition, a registrant's candor during the investigation and hearing, if one is requested, is an important factor in determining acceptance of responsibility and the appropriate sanction. Jones Total Health Care Pharmacy, 881 F.3d at 830-31; Hoxie v. Drug Enf't Admin., 419 F.3d 477, 483-84 (6th Cir. 2005). Further, the Agency considers the egregiousness and extent of the misconduct as significant factors in determining the appropriate sanction. Jones Total Health Care Pharmacy, 881 F.3d at 834 & n.4. The Agency also considers the need to deter similar acts by a registrant and by the community of registrants. Stein, 84 FR at 46972-73.

Here, although Registrant initially requested a hearing, he failed to “plead . . . or otherwise defend” and was deemed to be in default. 21 CFR 1301.43(c)(3). To date, Registrant has not filed any motion to set aside the default with the Office of the Administrator. Id. Thus, Registrant has made no representations as to his future compliance with the CSA nor made any demonstration that he can be entrusted with registration. Moreover, the evidence presented by the Government shows that Registrant was convicted of charges related to defrauding health care benefits programs, further indicating that Registrant cannot be trusted with registration.

Accordingly, the Agency will order that Registrant's 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. BF8869628, issued to Johann Farley, 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 Johann Farley, M.D., to renew or modify this registration, as well as any other pending application of Johann Farley, M.D., for additional registration in Indiana. This Order is effective October 29, 2026.

Signing Authority

This document of the Drug Enforcement Administration was signed on September 21, 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 ( printed page 61442) 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 .