A Patient’s Plea for Justice

My name is Kristen Ogden and I advocate for chronic pain patients.  My husband, Louis Ogden, is one of them; he has suffered from pain since he was a child.  Dr. Bockoff’s chronic pain patients have waited a long time for their day in court … and we’re still waiting.

Some readers may know about our efforts to intervene in the case of DEA vs. Dr. David Bockoff.  If you don’t, go to https://www.daily-remedy.com/as-i-sat-in-court-watching-the-dea/.  The following extract provides a short version.

After Louis’ pain specialist, David Bockoff, had his DEA registration suspended on the spot with no notice on Oct 25, 2022, we – a group of Dr. Bockoff’s patients and their spouses/families – decided we had had enough of being yanked around by DEA.  For many of us, this was not the first time we had lost our doctor due to DEA actions.  We hired Attorney John P. Flannery and he recommended that we file a Motion to Intervene in the case of DEA vs. David Bockoff.  We did so, and, as expected, the DEA Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) denied our motion.

The next step available to us was to appeal the ALJ’s decision, so we did.

The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals scheduled a session to hear oral arguments on January 23, 2024 from attorneys representing the patients and DEA.  There is legal precedent for “interested persons” to make a Motion to Intervene in a case before any of the Federal Agency-run Administrative Law Courts, provided they can demonstrate to the Court that they have a substantial interest in the outcome.  The Judgment of the Appeals Court, issued February 20, 2024, was less than satisfying.  It seems almost as if the 3 judges who sat on this panel didn’t take time to read the brief we submitted.

All of the involved persons were Dr. Bockoff’s patients and were affected when his DEA registration was suddenly suspended with no warning.  All of Dr. Bockoff’s patients were cut off with no plan for continued access to the essential medications that enable them to live without constant disabling pain … in other words, to have a life worth living.  How is this NOT a substantial interest in the outcome of DEA vs. David Bockoff?

The Judgment issued by the Court challenged our understanding of how these processes work and what’s required to be taken seriously.  The judges clearly didn’t take us seriously, describing a document we submitted as “a series of narratives purporting to be by pain patients or their spouses briefly explaining the circumstances that led them to seek treatment from Dr. Bockoff.”  The Judgment addressed the ways in which the Court felt our petition fell short, but did not acknowledge the substance, the merits of our concerns, at all.  The Court saw it differently, denying our petition for review, concluding that they had given our issues full consideration and determined that they do not even “warrant a published opinion.”  That said, the Judgment concludes by stating there is an opportunity to petition for rehearing.

So, we – the group of Dr. Bockoff’s patients and their spouses/families who started this effort to intervene – are not finished yet!  We want to take advantage of the opportunity to petition for rehearing … to petition the Court again to understand and consider what the DEA’s actions have done to this group of patients.  We want to be acknowledged and to set a precedent that will help doctors and other chronic pain patients whose care has been cut off or is at risk.

In order to continue fighting, we are seeking to raise funds to help cover the necessary legal effort and we are asking for help from the pain community and other concerned citizens.

Why should you donate to our cause?

Our post-hearing impressions provide ample reasons to go back and try again by petitioning for a rehearing.

• The judges were absorbed in procedural details and gave no attention to the merits of our concerns.
• The notion that we are merely “purporting” to be … pain patients and families seriously and substantially harmed by DEA … reveals the false but pervasive prejudice against citizens who suffer terribly.
• Those of us in the hearing room heard statements from the DoJ attorney that sounded incorrect, that need clarification or retraction. Were the statements indicative of poor preparation by the attorney or deliberate blurring of the facts?  The attorney said we could have attended the DEA ALJ hearing, but we were told we could not attend.  Is this accidental misinformation or deliberate deception?
• We want to be heard, to have a voice, but is seems that neither DEA nor the Court want to hear us. We are seeking the truth, but it is elusive.  We haven’t found it yet.

Many have said that this is probably the first time a group of patients have gotten together and tried to fight back against DEA.  We are not finished.  We are not giving up.

Please help us stay in the fight to set a precedent, to make chronic pain patients visible, to be taken seriously as suffering citizens.  In this effort, we honor the memories of those Dr. Bockoff patients who suffered and are no longer with us:

• Danny and Gretchen Elliott
• Jessica Fujimaki
• Rebecca Snyder

Look for our GoFundMe coming soon!!