Loops Decision 10.07.16
Loops Decision 10.07.16
vs.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, OFFICE
OF COMPASSIONATE USE,
Respondent.
RECOMMENDED ORDER
Pursuant to notice to all parties, a final hearing was
conducted in this case on July 6 through 8, 11, and
13 through 15, 2016, in Tallahassee, Florida, before
Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) R. Bruce McKibben of the
Division of Administrative Hearings (DOAH).
For Respondent:
The ALJ
PROs were due (which would have been September 2), the
Department filed a Motion seeking clarification of the due date.
Apparently, Loops had contacted the Department and expressed
its understanding that the PROs were due 45 days after the
transcript was filed at DOAH (despite the instructions given by
the ALJ at final hearing and set forth in writing in the
transcript).
for extension of time until September 12, 2016 to file the PROs;
the request was granted.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1.
denials.
session, passed House Bill 307 (CS for CS/CS/HB 307) and House
Bill 1313, which were signed into law on March 25, 2016, as
chapter 2016-123, Laws of Florida (referred to herein as the
2016 Law).
Those
That is the
Notwithstanding, OCU
potted plants.
art greenhouses.
a) Possess a valid
Cultivation
10
14.
It has a
There appears to be no
There is no
11
18.
Loops states:
A DACS
According to
According to
12
OCU reputedly
OCUs process
At that
13
San Felasco
14
Laninghams September 8, 2016 Informational Order on the MultiCriteria Evaluation, etc., entered in Plants of Ruskin, Inc. v.
Dept. of Health, DOAH Case No. 15-7270, wherein he calls into
question the entire process by which OCU scored the competing
applications, deeming the so-called scores to actually be
rankings and thus inconsistent with the statutory mandate.)
27.
Thus, Loops
comparison.
28.
15
San
Other
There is
16
31.
tree farm and that San Felasco dealt with outdoor plants.
Both
However, each of
The plan
There were,
however, some glitches pointed out in the Loops plan, e.g., its
24-hour on-site security was to be provided by a single
individual who, presumably, would need to sleep sometimes.
But
Loops had a good plan for doing so, but did not
17
However,
In the Loops
Eight
San Felasco
(The
18
Further, Loops
did not explain how its product would successfully compete with
the DOs approved in the other regions around the State.
So, in
total, Loops did not prove that its distribution plan was
superior to the other applicants plans.
35.
The van
Each
Loops own
19
The audited
20
The verification of
Thus, no comparison of
But,
But no
21
that low THC, high CDB marijuana can have enormously successful
results in children with significant medical conditions.
The
It is
All proceedings
The de novo
Thus,
Fams., 114 So. 2d 1127, 1132 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013), (quoting
McDonald v. Dept of Banking & Fin., 346 So. 2d 569, 584 (Fla.
1st DCA 1977)).3/
22
48.
Prot. v. Osborne Stern & Co., 670 So. 2d 932, 933 (Fla. 1996),
citing Fla. Dept of Transp. v. J.W.C. Co., 396 So. 2d 778 (Fla.
1st DCA 1981).
49.
The
2016 Law specifically says that the applicant must show that it
was entitled to be a dispensing organization.
This proceeding,
23
In the
381.986(5)(b)1, Fla.
A nursery
But receipt
24
If Chestnut
Hill had a letter from DACS that it had operated a nursery for
30 continuous years, then its application should have been
comparatively reviewed with the other applicants.4/
53.
b)
c)
d)
25
54.
form.
e)
f)
g)
While Loops
Loops stated
26
It
Loops
failed to do so.
56.
27
S
R. BRUCE MCKIBBEN
Administrative Law Judge
Division of Administrative Hearings
The DeSoto Building
1230 Apalachee Parkway
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060
(850) 488-9675
Fax Filing (850) 921-6847
www.doah.state.fl.us
Filed with the Clerk of the
Division of Administrative Hearings
this 7th day of October, 2016.
ENDNOTES
1/
The Stanley brothers developed the low THC, high CDB strain
of medical marijuana known as Charlottes Web. They have
gained notoriety in the industry as pioneers and recognized
experts in the cultivation of medical marijuana strains.
3/
29
30