Board hears petition to reinstate optician license; respondent admits mistakes, board to deliberate in closed session

The California State Board of Optometry heard a petition for reinstatement from Erasmo (Roswell) Soria on July 11, 2025, in a public hearing before an administrative law judge. The board admitted five previously marked exhibits and respondent-submitted supplemental materials, heard sworn testimony from Soria, and then moved into closed session to deliberate; the board did not issue a decision at the meeting and said a written notice of its decision will be provided later.

Soria testified under oath that he began working as an optician at 17, opened his own business in 1997 and that he “made mistakes” that led to enforcement action. He acknowledged a prior default decision that revoked his SLD license in 2011 and said he continued to work without a valid SLD license and without registration during some periods. When asked whether he would pay outstanding fines if the board conditioned reinstatement on payment, Soria answered, “Absolutely. Just as long as I can do it in payments, but I I will absolutely pay it.”

Deputy Attorney General Megan Bright presented the board’s summary of the case and introduced admitted exhibits, including Soria’s license and registration history and a citation issued April 29, 2025 (citation number 4202024000355) for holding oneself out to perform licensed activities without a license. Bright told the board that the 2025 citation issued a $5,000 fine and order of abatement that became final May 29, 2025, and that the petitioner had not paid the outstanding fines. Bright also reserved the right to question the petitioner.

The record the board admitted included: (a) jurisdictional documents and proof of service; (b) a certified copy of Soria’s registration and license history showing SLD4599 issued 08/23/2001; (c) the petitioner’s August 7, 2024 petition for reinstatement and supporting documents; (d) the board’s prior decision and order that led to revocation; and (e) citation 4202024000355 (April 29, 2025). Respondent also submitted supplemental materials (marked exhibit 6) during the hearing; those materials included a certificate from the American Board of Opticianry showing an expiration date of 12/31/2018 on a sticker the board noted during intake and copying.

Board members took the opportunity to ask Soria questions about why he had not paid earlier fines, why he continued to operate when licenses or registrations had lapsed, and why he had waited until 2024 to apply for registration. Soria repeatedly said fear and personal circumstances — including a divorce and the pandemic — contributed to his delay in resolving the matter, and that he “takes responsibility” for the lapses. Multiple board members stressed the consumer-protection purpose of licensure and said they could not support reinstatement for someone currently out of compliance, while others acknowledged the petitioner’s decades-long experience in the trade.

After testimony and direct questioning by the deputy attorney general and board members, the administrative law judge announced that the board would convene in closed session to deliberate on the petition. The judge told Soria the record was submitted and closed and that the board would provide written notice of its decision at a later date.

Clarifying details: the earlier citation issued in October 2009 (1G2009201518) imposed a $2,500 administrative fine; a 2010 accusation and subsequent default decision resulted in license revocation effective 01/07/2011. The board noted Soria applied for and was issued a registration (RDO70559) for The Eyeglass Company on 04/30/2024; the April 29, 2025 citation remained unpaid at the time of the hearing. The board admitted the petitioner’s supplemental documents and indicated those would be uploaded to the case tracking system as part of the record.

Ending: The board took no public final action at the meeting. It admitted evidence, heard sworn testimony, and sent the matter into closed session for deliberation; Soria will receive written notice of the board’s decision when it is issued.