The Medical Board of California convened on December 6, 2024, to discuss the case of Dr. Kamali, following a previous Administrative Law Judge's (ALJ) decision regarding disciplinary actions against the physician. The meeting focused on whether the board should adopt the ALJ's recommendation of a public reprimand or impose a more stringent disciplinary measure.

The plaintiff's counsel argued that the board should not only accept the ALJ's findings but also consider the extensive mitigating evidence presented. They emphasized that Dr. Kamali's record, which spans over 20 years without complaints, should weigh heavily in favor of a lesser penalty. The counsel highlighted that the board's own expert acknowledged that the medication record-keeping issues were not uncommon among anesthesiologists, particularly in the context of the hospital's operational challenges, such as the lack of Omnicell units in operating rooms.

In contrast, the deputy attorney general presented the board's position, asserting that the ALJ's recommendation was inadequate for public protection. They argued that the evidence clearly established multiple violations of state laws regarding controlled substances and repeated negligent acts concerning patient care. The deputy attorney general pointed out that the board's disciplinary guidelines typically call for a minimum of five years of probation, which was not reflected in the ALJ's decision.

The discussions highlighted a significant tension between the board's responsibility to protect public safety and the mitigating circumstances surrounding Dr. Kamali's case. The board ultimately faced the challenge of balancing these factors in determining the appropriate level of discipline.

As the meeting concluded, the board members were tasked with reviewing the arguments presented and deciding on the next steps regarding Dr. Kamali's case, which could have implications for future disciplinary actions and the standards applied in similar situations.