Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Probation Termination topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee reviews joint petitions from Arden Medical Pharmacy and pharmacist Cambiz Farzamdust
Summary
The committee heard two related petitions seeking early termination of probation after correspondence‑responsibility and dispensing irregularities were identified across multi‑year audits; petitioners described remediation (consultants, continuing education, repayment of costs) and argued operational changes reduce public risk.
The disciplinary petition committee heard joint petitions from Arden Medical Pharmacy and pharmacist Cambiz Farzamdust on Dec. 3, 2025. Deputy Attorney General Christina Jarvis described the underlying investigation (Feb. 2017–Feb. 2021), emphasizing groups of prescriptions that displayed multiple red flags: high starting opioid doses for patients who appeared opioid‑naive, frequent cash payments and prescribers with atypical prescribing patterns.
Jarvis told the committee that 40 prescriptions were flagged as particularly concerning and that the petitioners had been placed on five‑year probation (effective 07/07/2023). She noted that one prescriber discussed in the case had no record of authorizing many of the prescriptions identified and that at least one practitioner involved later faced federal criminal charges. Jarvis also reported that petitioner discharged investigation costs ($17,837 in 2024) and provided records showing continuing education and consultant oversight.
Petitioner Cambiz Farzamdust described system changes after probation began: documented red‑flag checklists, routine CURES checks, consultant audits, quarterly oversight and focused continuing education on controlled‑substance risk management. The petitioner and counsel emphasized that the pharmacy is now observing stricter workflows, that monitoring consultants have not identified ongoing violations, and that some PBM contracts and business relationships were disrupted by the probation.
Board members questioned petitioners about the scale of prior dispensing, the specific operational protocols now in place, and whether improvements would persist without mandated consultant oversight. The ALJ admitted the petition packet and closed the record. The committee submitted the case for closed‑session deliberation; no public action was taken at the meeting.
Next step: closed‑session deliberation and subsequent notification of the committee’s decision.
