Veterinary Medical Board hears petition to reinstate Dr. Balpal Sandhu after 2021 revocation

The Veterinary Medical Board held a hearing April 17, 2025, before an administrative law judge to consider the petition for reinstatement of veterinarian Balpal S. Sandhu, whose license was revoked in 2021. The Office of Administrative Hearings recorded testimony from Sandhu, his attorney Bonnie Lutz, a deputy attorney general representing the People of the State of California, and a witness whom Sandhu named as his managing licensee, Dr. Frank Marco.

The petition is tied to a 2021 final decision that revoked Sandhu’s license after findings of multiple record-keeping deficiencies, negligence and unprofessional conduct. The record introduced at the hearing included nine exhibits: jurisdictional documents, license history, prior discipline and the decision and order, a cost certification showing $47,512.11 in cost recovery plus a $5,000 fine (total $52,512.11), the petition for reinstatement, Sandhu’s written statement, recommendation letters, continuing-education certificates, and a LiveScan fingerprint submission. Deputy Attorney General Stephanie Alamo Lateef moved to admit the exhibits and stated the Attorney General’s office was present “to assist the ALJ and the board in fact finding. My role is not adversarial but intended to protect the public interest.”

Why this matters: The board’s earlier decision found deficiencies it said affected patient care; a reinstated license would allow Sandhu to resume clinical duties and could affect practices in the Antelope Valley and surrounding communities where Sandhu owns or is associated with premises registrations. The board said it would deliberate in closed session and issue a written decision — a process that could take at least a month.

What the record shows

Prior discipline and costs: The admitted exhibits include the 2016 stipulated settlement placing Sandhu on probation and the later 2021 decision revoking his license and three premises registrations. The 2021 decision ordered cost recovery ($47,512.11) and a $5,000 fine as conditions for reinstatement; those amounts were introduced to the record as Exhibit 4.

Sandhu’s testimony and rehabilitation steps: Sandhu testified that he has not practiced as a veterinarian since May 2021 and described a multi-year program of study and professional activity he says supports rehabilitation. He identified continuing-education courses taken in 2023 and 2024 on abdominal ultrasound, pain management, soft-tissue surgery and related topics, and he described attending the Western Veterinary Conference and other webinars. He said he spent extensive time reading textbooks and engaging with other veterinarians and mentors, and that he developed or is developing an electronic medical-records tool intended to prompt and enforce documentation and dosing protocols.

Sandhu acknowledged several specific faults identified in the earlier decision: failing to timely submit quarterly probation reports, misunderstanding and not obtaining preapproval for community service credited during probation, using whiteboard notes that were not entered into formal medical records, and failing to document or sufficiently titrate pain medication in some cases. He admitted under cross-examination that he had entered his license number on CE certificates taken while his license was not active and agreed that placing a revoked license number on CE paperwork was done so he could register for courses that he said were limited to veterinarians.

On pain management, Sandhu conceded that in some cases he used lower continuous-infusion rates (a hydromorphone/ lidocaine/ketamine mixture he described as “HLK”) than current references recommend; he told the board he would use published calculators (Plumb’s and veterinary dosing calculators) and institutional protocols to determine doses in the future.

Practice controls and witnesses: Sandhu called Dr. Frank Marco to testify as a witness. Marco, who identified himself as the managing licensee for the two practices Sandhu owns (All Creatures Veterinary Center and AV Veterinary Center), said he has implemented a number of changes since late 2024: regular internal inspections based on the veterinary board checklist, use of an electronic controlled-substance dispensing system (QBEX), formalized standard operating procedures, anesthesia checklists and Cornerstone electronic medical records. Marco said he performs regular audits, reports deficiencies to practice managers and would remain the managing licensee if Sandhu’s license were reinstated. Marco testified he started working with Sandhu’s practices in July 2024 and began serving as managing licensee in fall 2024.

Board questioning and contested points: Board members asked detailed questions about the gravity of the 41 causes for discipline and the circumstances that produced record-keeping and pain-management deficiencies. Members pressed Sandhu about failures to complete terms of prior probation — including quarterly reports and preapproved community service — and about two instances the final decision flagged where animals experienced pain problems or had outcomes the decision found below standards of care. Sandhu repeatedly acknowledged responsibility, said he learned from the experience and promised compliance if allowed to practice under probationary conditions.

Cross-examination highlighted several contested issues: whether some CE was obtained while Sandhu’s license was not active and whether his use of whiteboard notes constituted improper documentation. Sandhu conceded he had at times been present and given treatments he later failed to document in formal medical records, and he admitted one transfusion he performed was not medically indicated in hindsight.

Procedural outcome: At the close of testimony both parties delivered closing remarks. The petitioner’s attorney urged reinstatement on strict probation; the deputy attorney general reserved any recommendation and urged the board to impose probationary terms similar to previous conditions and to require cost recovery. The administrative law judge noted the matter was submitted and the record closed; the board convened in closed session immediately afterward to consider the petition. The judge told the parties they would receive a written decision in the coming weeks.

Ending

The board’s deliberations are confidential while they are in closed session. The record from April 17 will be part of the board’s decision file; the board said it expects to issue a written decision at least a month after the hearing. Until a decision is issued, Sandhu remains without an active veterinary license and may not resume clinical duties. The board will notify counsel and the petitioner by written decision.