Veterinary Medical Board hears reinstatement petition from Dr. Balpal Sandhu; record closed for deliberation

The California Veterinary Medical Board heard oral testimony and admitted documentary evidence April 17, 2025, in a petition by veterinarian Balpal Sandhu to reinstate a license that was revoked in 2021. The hearing, held before an administrative law judge and a quorum of board members, covered the board's prior disciplinary findings, the petitioner's continuing education and rehabilitation efforts, supervision and clinic controls, and outstanding financial obligations tied to the prior disciplinary order.

Why it matters: The board's prior decision revoked Sandhu's license after finding multiple acts of negligence, record-keeping violations and probation breaches. The outcome of the reinstatement petition will determine whether Sandhu may return to practice under conditions the board sets, including whether he must serve an additional period of probation and satisfy money orders required by the earlier decision.

The hearing record and exhibits Deputy Attorney General Stephanie Alamo Latif opened by offering nine exhibits into evidence, which the administrative law judge admitted without objection. Those filings included jurisdictional notices, Sandhu's license history, the board's prior decisions and revocation order, the accusation and petition to revoke probation, cost-recovery and fine documentation, Sandhu's petition for reinstatement, his written statement, letters of recommendation and continuing-education certificates. Exhibit 4 showed Sandhu would be required to pay a total of $52,512.11 (cost recovery $47,512.11 plus a $5,000 fine) as a condition of reinstatement if the board grants the petition.

Petitioner's testimony and rehabilitation evidence Sandhu testified at length about training and activities since his license was revoked in 2021. He described taking multiple continuing-education courses in 2023 and 2024 on abdominal ultrasound, pain management, soft-tissue and orthopedic surgery, and emotional-intelligence/stress management. He told the board he spent sustained time rereading textbooks, attending conferences (including the Western Veterinary Conference) and studying protocols to address the specific deficiencies identified in the earlier decision.

On several topics Sandhu acknowledged prior failures. He told the board he had not complied with all probation terms, including timely quarterly reports and obtaining preapproval for community-service work, and said, "I admit it" when asked about shortcomings in medical records and pain-management documentation. He explained that some treatment notes had been recorded informally on a clinic whiteboard and conceded that whiteboard entries are not a substitute for a signed medical record. He also said he believed he had underdosed certain continuous infusion pain protocols in the past and that he now intends to use published dosing calculators and standard references when prescribing.

Sandhu described nonclinical work he said he has done since revocation: developing an electronic medical-record tool to prompt and enforce required documentation, mentorship and staff training at his premises, and volunteer work with a wild-canine rescue group (he testified he did not perform veterinary procedures for that rescue). He said he has not acted as a veterinarian or RVT since May 2021 and that Dr. Frank Marco serves as the managing licensee who currently handles clinical oversight at Sandhu's facilities.

Witness testimony on clinic oversight Dr. Frank Marco, who testified as a witness for Sandhu, described steps taken at the clinics since he became managing licensee: monthly in-house inspections, implementation of a Cubex controlled-substance dispensing system with biometric access and computerized logs, and adoption of electronic medical-record software (Cornerstone) and anesthesia/pain-management checklists. Marco said he conducts mock inspections based on the board's checklist and documents and corrects deficiencies. On Sandhu's character and readiness to return, Marco told the board, "I firmly believe that he's sincere, that he's remorseful," and said he would allow the board or monitor to review records as needed if Sandhu returns to practice.

Areas of dispute and counsel positions The agency counsel emphasized the board's prior findings and noted that Sandhu had not successfully completed his prior probation. Counsel did not recommend a particular outcome at the hearing but urged that if the board grants reinstatement it should be on probation and require payment of the cost-recovery amount shown in the record.

Board process and next steps After direct and cross-examination and questions from board members, the hearing record was submitted and closed. The administrative law judge announced the record was closed and that the board would convene in closed session to deliberate. No public vote or decision was announced at the hearing. The judge and board told the parties that a written decision would be issued in the future and that the parties would be notified of the outcome in writing (the judge said a written decision could take at least about a month or more).

What the record contains and what it does not The hearing transcript and admitted exhibits document Sandhu's prior disciplinary history and the factual bases that led to revocation. The record also documents Sandhu's post-revocation activities, continued educational work, new clinic procedures and attestations by colleagues. The board took no public action at the hearing; any reinstatement, conditions, or further discipline would appear in the board's written decision.

The board will issue a written ruling after closed-session deliberations. The parties were told how to obtain updates through board counsel and were reminded the written decision is the official public record of any outcome.