Anthony Nguyen, O.D. v. Texas Optometry Board

Texas Court of Appeals, 15th District · May 15, 2025 · No. 15-24-00096-CV

Summary

This memorandum opinion from the Texas Fifteenth Court of Appeals affirms a trial court's judgment upholding the Texas Optometry Board's imposition of $4,000 in administrative penalties against optometrist Anthony Nguyen. The Board found that Dr. Nguyen violated the Texas Occupations Code by failing to personally examine a patient in person and by omitting required clinical findings before issuing a glasses prescription. The appellate court held that substantial evidence supported the Board's conclusion that Dr. Nguyen's remote, non-interactive review of test results did not constitute a "personal" examination and that he was not exempt under the physician-direction carve-out. Consequently, the court overruled both of Dr. Nguyen's issues on appeal.

Court
Texas Court of Appeals, 15th District
Writing for the Court
Chief Justice Brister; Justice Field; Justice Farris
Jurisdiction
Texas
Decision date
May 15, 2025
Docket number
15-24-00096-CV
Procedural posture
Appeal from the Texas 455th Judicial District Court judgment affirming the Texas Optometry Board's final order imposing administrative penalties.
Standard of review
substantial evidence
Precedential value
published
Parties
Anthony Nguyen, O.D. v. Texas Optometry Board
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

administrative lawstatutory interpretationplain meaning rulejudicial review of agency actionappellate procedure

Practice areas

health lawadministrative law

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Texas Occupations Code § 351.453 requires an optometrist to personally examine a patient in person before signing a prescription.
  2. Whether Nguyen is exempt from the Act’s examination requirements because he acted under the specific instructions of a physician.

Holdings

  1. The Court held that “personally examine” means an in‑person examination; Nguyen’s remote review did not satisfy the statutory requirement, and the Board’s conclusion that he violated the Act is affirmed.
  2. The Court held that Nguyen did not receive specific written instructions from a physician as required by Tex. Occ. Code § 351.005(a)(2)(B); therefore the exemption does not apply and the Board’s findings are affirmed.

Key quotations

When construing a statute, our primary objective is to determine the Legislature’s intent which, when possible, we discern from the plain meaning of the words chosen. (at 7)
The findings, inferences, conclusions, and decisions of an administrative agency are presumed to be supported by substantial evidence, and the burden is on the contestant to prove otherwise. (at 6)

Factual background

Optometrist Anthony Nguyen, O.D., worked as an independent contractor for a physician‑owned practice and remotely reviewed patient data before issuing a glasses prescription for Patient A without personally examining the patient or making several required findings under Texas Occupations Code §§ 351.353 and 351.453. The Board concluded Nguyen violated the Act and assessed $4,000 in penalties.

Procedural history

The Board filed a complaint with the State Office of Administrative Hearings alleging violations of the Texas Optometry Act. The ALJ issued a proposal for decision finding violations but not willful. The Board adopted the ALJ's findings and imposed $4,000 in penalties. The district court affirmed the Board's final order. Nguyen appealed to the Texas Court of Appeals, 15th District.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…