Dr. John Hayes

The appellant trainer appealed a 10-year suspension and $40,000 penalty arising from an out-of-competition test on a racehorse that yielded synthetic darbepoetin alfa.

The panel heard and decided only the threshold issue of whether the Certificate of Positive Analysis was valid, with the appellant attacking the chain of custody, laboratory standards compliance, shipping integrity, and the inability to promptly retest residual samples.

The panel held that the screening and confirmatory testing were properly performed, that the absence of a tamper-proof layer on shipment to the confirmatory laboratory did not undermine the reliability of the result, and that no actual or apprehended bias arose from identifying material in shipping documents.

The panel found clear, cogent and convincing evidence that the tested blood sample contained synthetic DPO and upheld the certificate, leaving the remaining issues in the appeal for later hearing.

Administrative appeal from a horse racing regulatory ruling imposing monetary penalties on a licensed veterinarian for alleged possession and dispensing of a product said to contain an unlabelled controlled ingredient and to be improperly labelled.

The Panel held that the Registrar had not met its burden on a balance of probabilities to prove the alleged violations, particularly where the evidence did not establish that pre-use testing was a reasonable expectation, did not clearly classify Pitcher Plant within the asserted regulatory categories, and accepted that the product had been used in the ordinary course of veterinary practice without knowledge of the unlabelled ingredient.

The Panel further found the drug-specific labelling rule was not engaged on the evidentiary record.

The appeal was allowed and the underlying ruling was set aside.