ALJDEC decisions subject to certification as final

22A-33212-MDX · Arizona Medical Board · 2022-11-10

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

In the Matter of

ROMEN K. JHA, M.D.

Holder of License No. 33212

For the Practice of Allopathic Medicine

In the State of Arizona

No. 22A-33212-MDX

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION

HEARING: September 21, 2022, with the record held open until October 7, 2022, for receipt of the court reporters transcript.

APPEARANCES: Respondent Romen K. Jha did not appear. The Arizona Medical Board were represented by Assistant Attorney General Seth T. Hargraves.

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Tammy L. Eigenheer

_____________________________________________________________________

FINDINGS OF FACT

Background and Procedure

Romen K. Jha, M.D. (Respondent) is the holder of Board-issued License No. 33212 for the practice of allopathic medicine in the State of Arizona, which was first issued on August 18, 2004. The license is set to expire on December 8, 2023.

The Board referred this matter to the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH), an independent state agency, for an evidentiary hearing on the allegations and charged acts of unprofessional conduct as defined by A.R.S. § 32-1401(27)(a), (e), (u), (ee), (kk), and (ss) as set forth in the Board’s August 1, 2022 Complaint and Notice of Hearing for License Revocation.

The Complaint and Notice of Hearing for License Revocation set a hearing before OAH at 9:00 a.m. on September 21, 2022. The Board mailed the Complaint and Notice of Hearing for License Revocation to Respondent via certified mail, regular mail, and email to his address of record.

Respondent did not request to appear telephonically or virtually at the hearing. Although the duly noticed hearing did not convene until 9:20 a.m. and did not conclude until 10:49 a.m., almost two hours after the noticed start time, Respondent did not appear, personally or through an attorney, and did not contact OAH. Consequently, Respondent did not present any evidence to defend his license to practice allopathic medicine in Arizona.

The Board submitted 35 exhibits and presented the testimony of Raquel Rivera, Investigations Manager with the Board, who investigated the complaints against Respondent.

Hearing Evidence

MS-20-0630A

On or about July 14, 2020, the Board initiated case number MD-20-0630A after receiving a complaint from Patient JS alleging that Respondent refused to return his calls, failed to provide test results, failed to present for his appointment, and failed to provide his medical records to allow him to transfer to another provider.

ON or about July 24, 2020, Patient JS resubmitted his complaint to the Board and included an additional allegation of fraudulent billing.

On or about August 5, 2020, Board staff sent Respondent a notice letter to his email address of record requesting patient records and a response to the allegations.

On or about August 21, 2020, Respondent emailed Board staff stating that he had not seen the email due to being out of town, and requested an extension.

Despite being granted a two week extension by Board staff, Respondent failed to respond or provide the requested patient records.

On or about February 4, 2021, Board staff contacted Respondent regarding his lack of a response to the allegations and his failure to provide the requested patient records. Respondent indicated that his staff should have provided the records requested by the Board. Respondent failed to follow-up and submit the requested information and records.

On or about February 22, 2021, Board staff left a voicemail for Respondent requesting that he follow-up with a response. Respondent failed to respond.

On or about March 1, 2021, Board staff left a message with Respondent’s office staff in an attempt to make contact with Respondent and obtain the previously requested information and records. There was no response from Respondent.

On or about March 30, 2021, Board staff left a message with Respondent’s Medical Assistant in an attempt to make contact with Respondent and obtain the previously requested information and records. There was no response from Respondent.

On or about June 15, 2021, a new investigator assigned to the matter sent correspondence to Respondent via regular and electronic mail, along with a copy of the initial August 5, 2020 notice, requesting a response by June 29, 2021. Respondent was informed that his failure to timely respond would result in an additional allegation of failing to furnish information to the Board in a timely manner. Respondent did not timely respond.

On or about July 1, 2021, Respondent provided a written response to the complaint. In his response, Respondent acknowledged his delayed response and indicated that, due to illness, he was not in the office during JS’s last office visit, and that JS was seen by his physician assistant Nicole on that day. Respondent disputed JS’s claim that he was denied test results. Respondent stated that his office’s policy was not to give test results over the phone and that JS was merely informed of that policy.

Respondent failed to provide any medical records with his July 1, 2021 response.

On or about August 5, 2021, Board staff sent Respondent an email reminding him that the Board had still not received any of the patient’s medical records that were requested from Respondent. Respondent subsequently faxed records to the Board later that day.

In the records for JS’s last office visit on June 30, 2020, there was no indication that JS was seen by anyone other than Respondent on that date; no indication that anyone other than Respondent wrote the progress notes for the appointment; and no reference to, or any mention of Nicole having any involvement in the appointment on that date.

The records for JS’s last office visit on June 30, 2020, showed that an alcohol screening was performed on that date. However, no documentation of the lab results of that screening were included in the records provided to the Board.

On or about August 5, 2021, Board staff sent Respondent a follow-up email inquiring whether he had submitted the entire chart, as there were documented visits with Nicole, not any lab results or phone messages.

On or about August 6, 2021, Respondent responded indicating that the last visit on June 30, 2020 was with Nicole and that he had signed off on it. Respondent also provided a screenshot of an appointment log, and indicated that those were the only visits.

The patient appointment log for JS provided by Respondent listed 13 non-cancelled visits beginning on September 12, 2017. However, Respondent only provided the Board with records for 5 of those visits.

Records provided by Respondent indicated that lab work was ordered during JS’s April 3, 2018 appointment, and that a follow-up appointment was scheduled for May 16, 2018 to review the lab results. The May 16, 2018 appointment was subsequently cancelled by JS. Respondent did not provide the Board with any lab results related to the April 3, 2018 appointment.

Records provided by Respondent indicated that lab work was ordered during JS’s February 27, 2020 appointment, and that a follow-up appointment was scheduled for March 5, 2020, to review the lab results. There was no indication that the March 5, 2020 appointment was cancelled; no records regarding the March 5, 2020 appointment were provided to the Board by Respondent; and no lab results were provided.

Board staff attempted to have a Medical Consultant (MC) review the case; however the MC reported that he was unable to opine on the case due to the dearth of records provided by Respondent.

On or about November 3, 2021, Board staff requested from Respondent copies of the patient’s records, requests, or releases signed by the patient and office phone notes, messages and/or call logs. Respondent responded to Board staff that he had sent everything he had on the patient.

On or about November 3, 2021, Board staff requested the patient’s billing records and any labs from 2020 and inquired how JS could obtain his records from Respondent.

On or about November 16, 2021, Respondent again apologized for his delay in responding and stated he could email the records directly to the patient and reported that the patient did not have many office visits. He stated he would have his EMR company send JS the entire medical record.

Respondent was asked to copy the Board on any emails to the patient, so the Board could ensure that the records were sent. Respondent did not provide any additional documents to the Board and had not demonstrated that he provided JS with his records.

MD-22-0139A

On or about January 18, 2022, the Board initiated case number MD-22-0139A after receiving a complaint from Patient AL alleging that he has his wife, SL, were unable to obtain a copy of their records from Respondent. According to the complaint, AL and SL have been attempting to obtain their records since August 2021, when they received a letter from Respondent that he was closing his office, and that Respondent had failed to respond to multiple messages.

On or about January 18, 2022, Board staff sent Respondent a letter notifying him of the complaint from AL and SL, and reminding him of his statutory obligations regarding the release of medical records.

On or about January 27, 2022, the Board received a complaint from Patient CP, who alleged that Respondent failed to inform her of his practice closure and failed to release her records despite her email request to him on January 4, 2022.

On or about January 27, 2022, Board staff sent Respondent a letter notifying him of the complaint from CP, and reminding him of his statutory obligations regarding the release of medical records.

On or about February 11, 2022, AL submitted another complaint reporting that he and his wife still had not received their records.

On or about February 23, 2022, Board staff sent Respondent a notice letter to his email address of record, requesting that he provide a response to the allegations by AL and SL and proof that he had furnished the records to the patients by March 9, 2022. Respondent did not respond.

On or about February 25, 2022, CP submitted another complaint stating that that she still had not received her records.

On or about February 25, 2022, Board staff sent Respondent a notice letter to his email address of record, informing him that the complaint by CP was being added to Case MD-22-0139A, and requesting that he provide a response to the allegations by CP and proof that he had furnished the records to the patient by March 11, 2022. Respondent did not respond.

On or about March 15, 2022, copies of the February 23, 2022, and February 25, 2022 notices were resent to Respondent by regular and electronic mail, again requesting that he provide a response to the allegations and proof that he had furnished the records to the patients by March 29, 2022. Respondent did not respond.

On or about January 4, 2022, CP sent an email to Respondent requesting that her medical records be forwarded to her new primary care physician. Respondent did not provide the records.

On or about March 29, 2022, AL and SL signed authorizations for release and consent for disclosure of medical records, which were sent to Respondent to authorize him to provide AL’s and SL’s medical records to their new primary care physician. Respondent did not provide the records.

Testimony

Respondent did not appear at the duly noticed hearing in this matter. On or about October 7, 2022, Respondent sent an email to the Office of Administrative Hearings regarding the allegations at issue in this matter. However, Respondent did not address his failure to appear at the September 21, 2022 hearing.

At hearing, Raquel Rivera, Investigations Manager, testified as to the Board’s process in handling complaints such as those raised in this matter. Ms. Rivera indicated that the matter can often be resolved with a letter advising the licensee of the obligation to provide medical records to patients upon request without the need to open a formal investigation of the complaint.

Ms. Rivera reviewed all of the unsuccessful measures Board staff took to get Respondent to respond to the records requests of his patients. Ms. Rivera stated that, based on Respondent’s failure to respond to Board staff, the Board was seeking revocation of Respondent’s license as he demonstrated he was unable to be regulated at the time.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

The Board is the duly constituted authority for licensing and regulating the practice of allopathic medicine in the State of Arizona. This matter lies within its jurisdiction.

The Complaint and Notice of Hearing that the Board mailed to Respondent at his address and email address of record was reasonable and Respondent is deemed to have received notice of the hearing.

The Board bears the burden of proof to establish cause to sanction Respondent’s license to practice allopathic medicine and factors in aggravation of the penalty by clear and convincing evidence. Clear and convincing evidence is “[e]vidence indicating that the thing to be proved is highly probable or reasonably certain.”

MD-20-0630A

The Board established by clear and convincing evidence that Respondent failed to respond, timely respond and/or provide the Board with requested information and documentation regarding JS. Therefore, the Board established that Respondent committed unprofessional conduct as defined by A.R.S. § 32-1401(27)(ee) (“Failing to furnish information in a timely manner to the board or the board's investigators or representatives if legally requested by the board”).

The Board established by clear and convincing evidence that Respondent failed to have documentation of the results of JS’s June 30, 2020 alcohol screening, failed to have any documentation regarding eight patient visits, and failed to have any documentation regarding results of JS’s April 3, 2018 or February 27, 2020 ordered lab work. Therefore, the Board established that Respondent committed unprofessional conduct as defined by A.R.S. § 32-1401(27)(e) (“Failing or refusing to maintain adequate records on a patient”).

The Board established by clear and convincing evidence that Respondent’s patient records for JS’s June 30, 2020 office visit documenting that the patient was seen by Respondent when the patient was actually seen by PA Nicole. Therefore, the Board established that Respondent committed unprofessional conduct as defined by A.R.S. § 32-1401(27)(e) (“Failing or refusing to maintain adequate records on a patient”).

The Board established by clear and convincing evidence that Respondent signed off of patient records for JS’s June 30, 2020 office visit documenting that the patient was seen by PA Nicole. Therefore, the Board established that Respondent committed unprofessional conduct as defined by A.R.S. § 32-1401(27)(u) (“Knowingly making any false or fraudulent statement, written or oral, in connection with the practice of medicine or if applying for privileges or renewing an application for privileges at a health care institution”).

MD-22-0139A

The Board established by clear and convincing evidence that Respondent failed to respond, timely respond and/or provide the Board with requested information and documentation regarding AL, SL, and CP. Therefore, the Board established that Respondent committed unprofessional conduct as defined by A.R.S. § 32-1401(27)(ee) (“Failing to furnish information in a timely manner to the board or the board's investigators or representatives if legally requested by the board”).

The Board established by clear and convincing evidence that Respondent failed to provide AL, SL, and CP with their medical records upon written request. Therefore, the Board established that Respondent committed unprofessional conduct as defined by A.R.S. § 32-1401(27)(a) (“Violating any federal or state laws or rules and regulations applicable to the practice of medicine”), specifically A.R.S. § 12-2293(A), A.R.S. § 12-2297(A)(1), and A.R.S. § 12-2297(B).

The Board established by clear and convincing evidence that Respondent failed to provide AL, SL, and CP with their medical records upon request. Therefore, the Board established that Respondent committed unprofessional conduct as defined by A.R.S. § 32-1401(27)(ss) (“Failing to make patient medical records in the physician's possession promptly available to a physician assistant, a nurse practitioner, a person licensed pursuant to this chapter or a podiatrist, chiropractor, naturopathic physician, osteopathic physician or homeopathic physician licensed under chapter 7, 8, 14, 17 or 29 of this title on receipt of proper authorization to do so from the patient, a minor patient's parent, the patient's legal guardian or the patient's authorized representative or failing to comply with title 12, chapter 13, article 7.1.”).

Respondent’s lack of response to patients and the Board, ongoing delays in response to Board communications, and failure to attend the hearing indicate that he cannot be regulated at this time.

RECOMMENDED ORDER

Based on the foregoing, it is ordered that on the effective date of the final order in this matter, Romen K. Jha’s, M.D.’s License No. 33212 for the practice of allopathic medicine in the State of Arizona shall be revoked.

It is further ordered that, pursuant to A.R.S. § 32-1451(M), Romen K. Jha, M.D. be charged for the cost of the formal hearing as determined by the Board.

In the event of certification of the Administrative Law Judge Decision by the Director of the Office of Administrative Hearings, the effective date of the Order will be five days from the date of that certification.

-54864001

001

-137160-45720000Done this day, November 10, 2022.

/s/ Tammy L. Eigenheer

Administrative Law Judge

Transmitted electronically or by mail to:

Patricia E. McSorley, Executive Director

Arizona Medical Board

Seth T. Hargraves

Office of the Attorney General

[email redacted]

Romen K. Jha

[email redacted]

Apollo Hospitalists PLLC

Banner Desert Medical Center

1400 S. Dobson Road

Mesa AZ 85202

By-54864001

001

-137160-45720000 Miranda Alvarez

Legal Secretary