Dr. Thomas A. Gionis
MEDICAL BOARD RECORD—39248
DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS—License renewed & current; Felony Conviction
Letter—FDA, Inspections, Compliance, Enforcement, and Criminal Investigations
State Seeks to Revoke Gionis’ Medical License : Charges: New allegation of sexual misconduct with a patient is brought against physician convicted of masterminding an assault on ex-wife Aissa Wayne.
SANTA ANA — State officials Monday took the first step toward revoking the medical license of Pomona physician Thomas A. Gionis, leveling new charges that he engaged in “sexual misconduct” with a patient.
Gionis, 38, was convicted last month of masterminding an assault on his estranged wife, Aissa Wayne–daughter of the late film legend John Wayne–and her then-boyfriend in the midst of a 1988 child custody dispute arising from their separation.
Gionis faces up to eight years in prison on the assault conviction and will be sentenced next month.
The state routinely seeks to revoke the licenses of doctors convicted of felonies. But state papers served on Gionis Monday include not only the assault charges raised in his trial, but also the new sexual misconduct allegation as well.
Gionis, who is now free on bail, could not be reached for comment. His criminal attorney, William Kopeny, did not return several phone calls.
Deputy Atty. Gen. Randall B. Christison, who is handling the case, said that Gionis will now have several weeks to respond to the civil accusation.
If he contests the allegations of sexual misconduct, the matter will be tried before an administrative law judge, who will then make a recommendation to the Medical Board of California on whether Gionis should have his license revoked or face less stringent disciplinary action, such as a suspension.
The new charge against Gionis alleges that the Pomona physician “committed an act of sexual abuse and misconduct against a patient in the course of his practice.” It goes on to allege that Gionis had the patient partially disrobe without medical need, massaged her “for purposes of sexual gratification,” and then initiated sexual contact with her.
Christison, the prosecutor, said in an interview that the patient, who was about 20 years old at the time, went to Gionis for back or neck pain after a car accident. But she became alarmed after Gionis had her take her bra off and began massaging her and rubbing against her.
“She said, ‘I’ve had enough of this,’ got up, put on her clothes and scurried out of the office,” Christison said.
Christison said that if the case goes to trial before an administrative law judge, the state will put on evidence concerning both the sexual misconduct allegation and the assault on Aissa Wayne for which Gionis was convicted.
Six weeks ago, a jury in Orange County Superior Court found Gionis guilty on charges of conspiracy to commit assault, conspiracy to commit residential trespass, assault with a deadly weapon and assault with a firearm. It was his second trial on the charges after a jury deadlocked 9 to 3 in 1990.
The charges stemmed from a 1988 attack at the $3-million Newport Beach estate of Roger W. Luby. During the attack, Luby and then-girlfriend Aissa Wayne were assaulted at gunpoint. Wayne’s head was smashed twice against the concrete floor of the garage, while both of Luby’s legs were slashed in the area of his Achilles tendon in an apparent attempt to permanently disable the tennis buff. The couple were warned by the attackers that they were making trouble for “the wrong people.”
Prosecutors maintained that Gionis was “obsessed” with winning custody of his young daughter from Wayne and orchestrated the attack, using a private detective in Beverly Hills to hire the two men who carried it out.
Christison said that with the allegations of both the Wayne assault and sexual misconduct against Gionis, “we’re confident that there’s sufficient grounds for a revocation of his medical license.” (LINK) — 06/30/1992
Gionis Sentenced to 5 Years for Wayne Attack : Court: The judge says the ex-husband of John Wayne’s daughter has a ‘dangerous combination … of no remorse and a need to control.’
SANTA ANA — The ex-husband of John Wayne’s daughter was sentenced Monday to five years in prison for masterminding an attack that a judge said went “way beyond what a normal husband would do in a divorce situation.”
Dr. Thomas Gionis, 38, appeared calm as he was sentenced for soliciting the beating in which two hired thugs bound Aissa Wayne, 36, and slammed her face into a garage floor on Oct. 3, 1988. Gionis and Wayne were locked in a bitter custody battle at the time.
The attackers also bound Wayne’s then-boyfriend, Roger Luby, pistol-whipping him and slashing his Achilles tendon during the attack at Luby’s Newport Beach estate.
In addition to the prison sentence, Superior Court Judge Theodore E. Millard fined the Pomoma physician $10,000 and ordered him to serve three years’ probation after completing his prison sentence. The judge estimated that, with work credits, Gionis could be free in as little as 2 ½ years.
Millard set bail for Gionis at $2 million pending an appeal of his conviction. The judge said he was setting such a high bail because he felt Gionis was a flight risk. In addition, Gionis has demonstrated “no remorse and a need to control,” which the judge called “a dangerous combination.”
Gionis was immediately taken into custody after the unusual, daylong sentencing hearing.
The hearing, in which both sides called witnesses and each of the two victims testified, was a microcosm of the trial. It included a rehashing of the couple’s breakup and bitter custody battle over their daughter. It also included defense jabs at the lifestyles of the rich and famous of Newport Beach, as contrasted with the strivings of Gionis, described by his attorneys as an overachieving son of an immigrant plumber.
Luby, who made an impassioned statement in court, said later that he was disappointed that Gionis did not receive a longer sentence, calling him “a controller.” Gionis is “a scoundrel. He belongs in jail,” Luby said.
Wayne, who was accompanied by her mother, Pilar, said, “I hope that he can learn something from this. I’m kind of stunned right now. I think that the crime was so violent, and I think that Judge Millard had a good handle on a little of what Dr. Gionis truly is.”
Wayne said she expected to return to family court to regain full custody of her daughter, Anastasia, now 5, who has been spending weekdays with Gionis and his family.
In denying a new trial for Gionis, Millard said there was abundant evidence of Gionis’ guilt, including telephone calls made from the scene by a private investigator hired by Gionis to carry out the attack and threats voiced by Gionis to others regarding the custody battle.
“Who else would have a motive to do such a thing?” the judge asked. “It wouldn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that an orthopedic surgeon might have something to do with Mr. Luby’s injuries to his Achilles tendon.
Speaking as a former family court judge, Millard said that Gionis’ actions went "way beyond what a normal husband would do in a divorce situation.”
A probation report said Gionis “has certainly not come to terms with the degree of his internalized rage and obsessive need to control, which may manifest in a threatening or lethal manner.”
One of Gionis’ three attorneys replied that Gionis expressed no remorse to the probation officer for his role in the attack on legal grounds, to preserve his position for an appeal of the conviction.
But Millard agreed with the probation report, saying “control is what this trial is about.”
“It truly must be a frightening experience to have two completely unknown thugs … come through a gate that’s being closed … and then to be attacked, forced on the floor, head beaten in the ground, all kinds of comments being made… . I really have to have empathy for the victims in the case… . It had to be a traumatizing and brutalizing experience.”
Gionis was tried in 1990 for the attack, but the jury deadlocked. He was represented Monday by two of Orange County’s and one of New York City’s best-known defense attorneys: William J. Kopeny and John D. Barnett, both of whom were involved in defending a Los Angeles police officer in the Rodney G. King beating case; and Bruce Cutler, best known for his defense of mobster John Gotti.
In addition to the probation report, Deputy Dist. Atty. Jeoffrey L. Robinson offered evidence that Gionis was being investigated by the Medical Board of California, which may take his license, for an incident of sexual misconduct with a patient predating the attack on Wayne and Luby. Robinson also cited letters to the judge from Gionis associates alleging financial misconduct and sexual relations with other patients.
“I feel that justice was done,” Robinson said of the sentence. “I think that he is deserving of a state prison sentence, and I only hope that high bail is enough to ensure that he serves his sentence just as any other convicted felon would.”
Last month, Oded Daniel Gal, Gionis’ private investigator, pleaded guilty to four felony counts for his role in the attack. Gal faces up to 5 years and eight months in prison when sentenced July 31.
One of the two men who previously admitted to police that they carried out the attack, Jerrel Hintergardt, is serving an eight-year sentence, which has been upheld by an appeals court. The other, Jeffrey K. Bouey, awaits trial. (LINK) — 07/07/1992
From a Medical Board of California document:
THE DIVISION OF MEDICAL QUALITY OF THE MEDICAL BOARD OF CALIFORNIA HAS DETERMINED, upon review of certified copies of records of the Superior Court, County of Orange, that:
1. On July 6, 1992, in People v. Thomas A. Gionis (Case No. C-73252), you were convicted based on jury verdicts of the following offenses:
a. In count one, conspiracy to commit assault in violation of Penal Code sections 182(a)(1) and 240;
b. In count two, conspiracy to commit trespass of a residence, in violation of Penal Code sections 182(a)(1) and 602.5;
c. In count three, assault with a deadly weapon, in violation of Penal Code section 245(a)(l);
d. In count four, assault with a firearm, in violation of Penal Code section 245(a)(2).
2. As punishment for these crimes, you were sentenced to state prison for five years, with credit for 25 days time served. You were remanded into custody by the Court, but granted bail on appeal thereafter.
3. On May 8, 1995, bail on appeal was revoked by the Superior Court and a no-bail warrant was issued.
4. You are currently serving the five-year state prison term imposed by the Superior Court, County of Orange, in the custody of the Department of Corrections at the Richard J. Donovan Correctional Facility at Rock Mountain, San Diego, California. Your inmate identification number is H 41141.
THE DIVISION OF MEDICAL QUALITY OF THE MEDICAL BOARD OF CALIFORNIA HAS FURTHER DETERMINED THAT, by virtue of your conviction and imprisonment, the Physician’s and Surgeon’s Certificate No. C 39248 issued to Thomas A. Gionis has been automatically suspended by operation of law effective May 8, 1995.
DATED: June 6, 1995 (LINK)
Gionis case still not necessarily closed
A criminal record is like a fingerprint. It’s like a shadow you can’tshake off. It’s like being bound by invisible shackles.
Dr. Thomas Gionis probably knew that. But he was reminded of that unpleasant truth a couple weeks ago when the John Marshall Law Review –part of the John Marshall Law School in Chicago – canceled his appointment as the incoming editor-in-chief.
Gionis, 47, is currently a second-year student there and was elected to the post in March.
But nine years ago, the then-Irvine orthopedic surgeon was in a different place – he was convicted and sentenced to serve five years in prison for hiring two thugs to attack his estranged wife, Aissa Wayne, daughter of the late actor and local legend John Wayne.
Aissa Wayne and her boyfriend, Roger Luby, were assaulted in Luby’s Newport Beach home in October 1988. According to reports, Wayne was thrown face down on a garage floor while attackers – said to be hired by Gionis – pistol-whipped Luby and severed his Achilles tendon. Gionis’ trial was long and grueling, probably painful for all concerned. It was definitely high-profile. Gionis hired top defense attorneys such as F. Lee Bailey, John Barnett and even Bruce Cutler, a flamboyant attorney who represented New York mob boss John Gotti.
In 1990, Gionis’ first trial ended in a mistrial when the jury deadlocked 9-3. Two years later, his second trial ended in a conviction and Gionis was sentenced to five years in prison. But he remained free on a $2-million bail.
Then, again in 1994, a 4th District Court of Appeal threw out the conviction citing improper testimony by an attorney and misconduct by the prosecutor. But the following year, the California Supreme Court reinstated the conviction, a decision that led to his arrest in May 1995.
The case might have been closed in the courts, but not in the life of the once-convicted Gionis.
When contacted by phone at his Chicago home, Gionis expressed his displeasure with past newspaper coverage, denied comment and hung up. John Marshall Law School officials said the decision to oust Gionis as incoming editor-in-chief was made entirely by the board of the Law Review, which consists of students.
“They may have discussed it with faculty members,” said John Corkery, Associate Dean for Academic Affairs. “But we always try to let the board make its own decisions.”
The position of editor-in-chief at the Law Review is a “very prestigious” one, he said. Gionis continues to be a student and a member of the Law Review and is free to run for other editorial positions as they open up, Corkery said.
It takes a lot even to be a member of the Law Review, said Rory Smith, associate dean for institutional advancement.
“From our perspective,” he said, “our strongest students become members of the Law Review.” (LINK) — 04/18/2001
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. THOMAS GIONIS, Defendant and Appellant. (excerpt)
(Superior Court of Orange County, No. 73252, Theodore E. Millard, Judge.)
(Opinion by Baxter, J., with Lucas, C. J., Arabian, George and Werdegar, JJ., concurring. Separate concurring and dissenting opinion by Kennard, J. Separate dissenting opinion by Mosk, J.)
OPINION
BAXTER, J.
On October 3, 1988, Aissa Marie Wayne and her friend Roger Luby were brutally assaulted by two men. Four men were arrested, including defendant Thomas Gionis, Wayne’s former husband. At defendant’s trial, the prosecutor argued that Wayne and defendant had been locked in a bitter custody battle over their young daughter, Anastasia, and that defendant was behind the assault. John Lueck, an attorney, was permitted to testify for the prosecution that defendant had told him, among other things, that Wayne had no idea how easy it would be for defendant to hire someone to “really take care of her,” and that if defendant were to do something, he [9 Cal. 4th 1202] would wait until an opportune time to act in order to avoid suspicion. The jury convicted defendant of conspiracy to commit an assault (Pen. Code, former § 182, subd. 1, as amended by Stats. 1989, ch. 897, § 15, p. 3062, now Pen. Code, § 182, subd. (a)(1); Pen. Code, § 240), conspiracy to commit a trespass (Pen. Code, former § 182, subd. 1, as amended by Stats. 1989, ch. 897, § 15, p. 3062, now Pen. Code, § 182, subd. (a)(1); Pen. Code, § 602.5), assault with a deadly weapon on Luby (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(1)), and assault with a firearm on Wayne (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(2)). Defendant was sentenced to an aggregate term of five years in state prison.
The Court of Appeal reversed defendant’s convictions. It determined that the trial court prejudicially erred in admitting the evidence of defendant’s statements to Lueck in derogation of the attorney-client privilege, even though the statements were made after Lueck had explicitly refused to represent defendant in the legal proceedings involving Wayne. The court also found that defendant was prejudiced by the prosecutor’s misconduct and improper disparagement of defense counsel in closing arguments.
We granted review in this case to determine whether defendant’s communications with Lueck were protected by the attorney-client privilege, and whether the prosecutor’s arguments constituted prejudicial misconduct. On the privilege issue, we hold that the Court of Appeal erred in disturbing the trial court’s determination that the privilege did not apply. In addition, we conclude that defendant’s statements were not inadmissible under Evidence Code section 352. Finally, we find that the Court of Appeal erred in determining that the prosecutor committed prejudicial misconduct. We therefore reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeal, and remand the matter to that court for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.
I. Factual and Procedural Background
Defendant, a doctor, and Aissa Marie Wayne, daughter of the late movie actor John Wayne, were married in 1986. In February 1987, defendant and Wayne had a daughter named Anastasia.
Soon after the baby was born, the marriage began to deteriorate. Defendant twice threatened to kill Wayne if she got in the way of his relationship with Anastasia. He also warned Wayne that if she left him he would flee to Greece with Anastasia and Wayne would never see her daughter again. Despite these threats, Wayne left defendant in June 1987, taking Anastasia with her.
A bitter custody dispute ensued. A few months after Wayne left defendant, she discovered that she was under surveillance by Dan Gal, a private [9 Cal. 4th 1203] investigator hired by defendant. Although Wayne knew she was being watched, she pursued her normal lifestyle.
Christine Foss was an employee of defendant at his clinics in Upland, Corona del Mar and Palm Springs. In July 1987, defendant told Foss of his anger over Wayne’s departure and said he could hire people to physically harm Wayne if she ever “messed with him.” Subsequently, defendant told Foss and a coworker to resign from his clinics after they went to watch Wayne play tennis in Corona del Mar. Foss did not report her conversation with defendant to the police until three months after the assaults on Wayne and Luby in October 1988.
John Lueck was an attorney who referred clients to defendant for medical evaluations. In May or June 1987, Lueck received a telephone call from defendant asking him to come to defendant’s home. Defendant was in tears. He said he had just been served with divorce papers, and he needed somebody to talk to because he was upset. Although Lueck initially declined to go to defendant’s home, he ultimately agreed to meet defendant after making it clear that he would not be willing to have any involvement as a lawyer in defendant’s dissolution case. Lueck refused to represent defendant because he knew both defendant and Wayne.
When Lueck arrived at defendant’s home, defendant said he was upset about the circumstances of the separation and about the fact that Wayne had taken the baby. Defendant displayed very wide mood swings, alternating between tears and anger. At one point during the visit, defendant showed Lueck a declaration by Wayne in support of an order to show cause, and indicated he would like to change venue from Orange County to Los Angeles County because Wayne was the daughter of one of Orange County’s most famous residents; the county airport was his namesake. Lueck, speaking as defendant’s friend, said he thought a change of venue might be appropriate, but did not offer to do it. Lueck also told defendant to quickly retain a good attorney.
While in one of his very angry moods, defendant showed Lueck some holes in a wall, as well as a closet door off its track in the bedroom. Defendant said that the altercation which resulted in the holes in the wall was nothing relative to what he was capable of doing. He also told Lueck that Wayne “had no idea how easy it would be for him to pay somebody to really take care of her.”
After hearing defendant make these statements, Lueck commented that if something were to happen to Wayne during the dissolution or a child [9 Cal. 4th 1204] custody dispute, defendant would certainly be the primary suspect. Defendant replied he “was too smart to do something like that at a time when it would be obvious that it was his responsibility.” Defendant then said that if he were to do something, he “would wait until an opportune time and circumstances [sic] so that suspicion wouldn’t be directed towards him.” Defendant also told Lueck he had friends, family and money in Greece available to him in the event he needed to leave the country. Lueck did not immediately contact the police about defendant’s statements because at the time he believed they were simply expressions of anger.
On a Friday in October 1987, defendant showed up at Lueck’s office, apparently upset with some papers that had been prepared by his counsel in his dissolution case. Defendant appeared desperate. He told Lueck that Wayne was trying to prevent him from having Anastasia at her baptism, that his attorney was unavailable, and that something had to be done immediately because people were leaving Greece that Friday afternoon for the baptism. Defendant pleaded with Lueck to go to court on an ex parte basis. Lueck agreed, but when he went to court, an irate judge told him that arrangements had already been made. The judge then accused Lueck of being part of an effort to harass Wayne. Lueck was paid $750 for the court appearance.
During January and February 1988, Wayne began a romantic relationship with Roger Luby. Wayne had been upset over the breakup of her marriage and the custody dispute, and she leaned heavily on Luby for emotional support. At some point, defendant made sarcastic remarks to Wayne concerning Luby and commented on the considerable amount of time that they spent playing tennis.
In the summer of 1988, Robert Cornely visited Gal, the private investigator hired by defendant. At Gal’s house were Jerrel (or Jerry) Hintergardt and another man. Cornely had agreed to help Gal by going with Hintergardt and the other man to serve papers regarding a custody dispute at a house in the beach area. Cornely was unaware anything unlawful was planned, but he was uncomfortable and felt the situation was “not right.” Cornely and the others left after the person for whom they were waiting did not come home.
On the morning of October 3, 1988, Wayne and Luby attended an aerobics class in Corona del Mar. At approximately 11:30 a.m., they returned to Luby’s residence in Newport Beach. Hintergardt and a man named Jeffrey Bouey were waiting. They approached Luby and Wayne as Luby and Wayne exited their car in the garage, and asked Luby if his name was Roger Luby. Luby said yes.
Suddenly, the men drew guns. When Luby asked if they were joking, Hintergardt said, “This isn’t no fucking joke,” and struck Luby on the head [9 Cal. 4th 1205] with his gun. Hintergardt threatened to kill Luby if he yelled or screamed. He forced Luby to the ground, holding the gun to his head. After handcuffing Luby’s hands and ankles, Hintergardt repeatedly smashed Luby’s face into the concrete floor, warning him not to move or scream. Hintergardt then severed Luby’s right Achilles tendon with a knife, and attempted to do the same to the left tendon.
Meanwhile, Bouey held a gun to Wayne’s head and forced her to the ground. When Hintergardt finished with Luby, he handcuffed Wayne’s hands and feet. Hintergardt yelled at Wayne, then grabbed her hair and slammed her face into the concrete floor twice. Wayne felt her head split open and blood stream down her face. Hintergardt told her, “You’re fucking with the wrong people.”
After Hintergardt and Bouey left, Wayne and Luby were taken to a hospital for medical treatment. Wayne required more than two dozen stitches for the wound to her head. Luby received stitches on his head and on his severed right Achilles tendon. He had to wear a full hip-to-ankle cast for three weeks, then a knee-to-ankle cast for some time after that. Even after months of therapy, Luby’s right Achilles tendon felt dead and numb.
Gal, Hintergardt, Bouey and defendant were arrested. None of them testified at defendant’s trial. Telephone records, however, showed that more than 1,000 telephone calls were made between numbers connected to Gal and defendant (and calls between telephones connected to Gal and Hintergardt and Hintergardt and Bouey). Although there were never any calls directly between the numbers for defendant and Hintergardt or Bouey, a flurry of calls between the numbers for Gal and defendant occurred on October 3, 1988, just before and after the attack on Wayne and Luby. Several calls were placed between Hintergardt and Gal on that date as well. The records also revealed that, on the day after the attack, Gal called defendant’s number immediately after a police officer told Gal that his car was seen near the scene of an attack the day before, and that a detective would like to speak with him. fn. 1 In addition, bank records showed that defendant paid a considerable amount of money to Gal during the period of the surveillance. By far the largest payment, $40,000, was paid within the two weeks preceding the attacks.
The jury found defendant guilty on all four charged counts: conspiracy to commit an assault, conspiracy to commit a trespass, assault with a deadly [9 Cal. 4th 1206] weapon on Luby, and assault with a firearm on Wayne. fn. 2 After denying defendant’s motion for a new trial, the trial court sentenced him to an aggregate term of five years in state prison. Additionally, the court granted a motion for bail pending appeal, and set bail at $2 million.
The Court of Appeal reversed defendant’s convictions, finding that defendant was prejudiced by a combination of the trial court’s erroneous admission of defendant’s statements to John Lueck in violation of the attorney-client privilege, and the prosecutor’s misconduct and improper disparagement of defense counsel in closing arguments. We granted the People’s petition for review. (More at this LINK) —05/04/1995
Students Claim They Were Misled by University
No records indicate Aristotle University is licensed by the state, according to NBC 7 investigation
Albert Anarwat, 24, worked as a nurse in his home country of Ghana, Africa. His passion was helping others.
“If you look at where we are coming from, we have a lot of problems, health issues,” he said.
Students Claim They Were Misled by University
Albert Anarwat, 24, worked as a nurse in his home country of Ghana, Africa. His passion was helping others. (Published Wednesday, Feb. 6, 2013)
Raised by farmers in a small mud hut, Albert dreamed of a better life.
“I wanted to help my family, put them in a better position.”
Last September, Albert decided to come to the United States to get his Master’s degree in Public Health. A friend told him about Aristotle University in Carlsbad. The program cost $25,000 for a two-year course.
He sold everything, used his entire life savings, about $10,000 to move to the United States. He says he’s paid $3,000 to Aristotle University. But, when Albert arrived in September, it was nothing like he had envisioned. Instead of a large sprawling campus, the entire University was in one room, in an office building.
Albert told NBC7, “It’s just an office. There’s no library. There is nothing. Just a few chairs.”
Albert says the director of admissions said they would help him find a job and assist with housing, while he was a student. But, Albert was dropped off at a motel and the job never came. He was thrust into a classroom with other international students, into a course that was already eight months in progress.
Albert says class is held once a week. He says most of the time they watch educational videos and use old textbooks. At one time there were more than 20 students, Albert says less than a dozen attend now.
“The issue is, if we are paying at the end of the day what am I going to get from it? I am just going to get a mere paper that cannot take me anywhere? And I cannot defend the course because they are not giving me the best and you go home and they say you have Masters in public health and you have nothing.”
On its website, Aristotle University claims it is licensed by the Bureau for Private Post-Secondary and Vocational Education, but a spokesperson from that bureau told us there is no record of it ever being licensed by the state.
The spokesperson also says it has begun a preliminary investigation of Aristotle’s claim, based on our inquiry. The University’s website says Aristotle is also a law school. But the school is not registered with the State Bar of California.
NBC 7 checked to see if Aristotle had a business license in the City of Carlsbad and found none.
Lisa Robinson works for a nursing agency and befriended 8 of the students.
“I went to the police department, who referred me to the city code enforcement, who referred me to business and licensing,“ Robinson said. "It was just this big circle.”
She tried desperately to get them help from nearly 30 different agencies or elected officials. She says no one will help her.
“I just hate injustice and I just can’t believe this is happening , you know I can’t believe this is happening to human beings.”
Albert isn’t the only student who has complaints about Aristotle University. We received e-mails from other Aristotle Students.
One student from Cameroon wrote an email that stated in part, “There are no professors, classes are held once a week on Monday and if Monday is a holiday then no class for that week. The situation is not anything I had anticipated, not even in my country had I seen such meaningless education offered to students.”
This was an email from a student from Ghana: "I claim to be pursuing public health, but unfortunately I cannot speak on public health related issues. This is because I am studying fiction. There is no doubt that, Aristotle University have lured us immigrants into the USA only to use as money making machines at the expense of our future.”
Another email provided to NBC7 by a student shows that if tuition payments are late, the schools’ Dean and co-founder, Xanthi Gionis says they will be stripped of their student Visas and Deported. This is the reason students are scared to speak out.
“So because of that, most of us are paying the fees not because of the school. Because we are just paying to live in the United States. Because we don’t want to get immigration problems,” said Albert.
NBC 7 reached out to the co-founders and deans Dr.Thomas Gionis and Xanthi Gionis, to get reaction to the accusations. NBC 7 called the number listed on Aristotle University’s website, but there was no answer or voicemail. Meantime NBC 7 sent Xanthi Gionis an email asking her to respond, within minutes, the school’s website was taken down.
NBC 7 went to the classroom on Palomar Airport Road. No one was there. We did get a response by email from Xanthi Gionis on Friday. She told us the school had been sold, but she wouldn’t give us the name of the new owner. A public records search didn’t provide any indication it had been sold.
Sunday night, students received an email from Xanthi Gionis stating that classes has been relocated to a new office building on Carlsbad Village Drive. She told one student to bring a tuition check to that location for $1,000 dollars.
Monday morning, NBC 7 went to the school’s new location. Xanthi Gionis was there, but closed and locked the office door when NBC7 asked for a comment. Then Xanthi Gionis called the police.
But Carlsbad police officers said NBC 7 crews were acting within their legal rights.
Meanwhile, Albert says all he wants is a real education and to get his Master’s degree in public health.
“I cry every day,“ he said. "I weep every day. I never knew there could be something like this happening in the nation like United States.”
He wants to feel like someone in the U.S. cares about him, just as much as he cares about helping others in his home country.
“Sometimes I look at the world and say it’s very unfair.” (LINK) — 02/06/2013
My new ‘neighbor’ in Sacramento: a fat stem cell clinic
For years I’ve been writing about stem cell clinics that sell non-FDA approved stem cell “treatments” to vulnerable patients right here in America.
These clinics have been sprouting up like mushrooms across the US and their numbers may be above 200 today overall. As a result perhaps it was inevitable that one would arrive in a locale near me.
Tomorrow, July 11, reportedly the Irvine Stem Cell Treatment Center will open a Sacramento, CA branch. The doctor there will apparently be Thomas A. Gionis. This private, for-profit clinic has no affiliation with UC Davis School of Medicine in Sacramento where I’m located.
The stem cell clinic Sacramento branch will sell transplants of fat stem cells in the form of something called stromal vascular fraction or SVF, which I believe is almost certainly a drug. To my knowledge this clinic and the large chain that it belongs to called Cell Surgical Network (CSN), do not have FDA approval to use SVF.
Both publicly and to me on this blog, CSN continues to argue that it doesn’t need FDA approval (here, here and here), but recent FDA draft guidances sure suggest otherwise in my view. Of course if the FDA never takes action on the use of SVF then how are we all supposed to interpret that? Without FDA action or finalized guidelines, is it formally possible that the FDA could back down on SVF?
This clinic will reportedly sell SVF to treat a dizzying array of conditions having nothing to do with fat:
“Emphysema, COPD, Asthma, Heart Failure, Heart Attack, Parkinson’s Disease, Stroke, Traumatic Brain Injury, Lou Gehrig’s Disease, Multiple Sclerosis, Lupus, Rheumatoid Arthritis, Crohn’s Disease, Muscular Dystrophy, Inflammatory Myopathies, and Degenerative Orthopedic Joint Conditions (Knee, Shoulder, Hip, Spine).”
To me as a scientist the use of SVF to treat all these very different conditions does not make good common sense.
It would also seem arguably to be quite likely be considered “non-homologous use” by the FDA, a standing that would also automatically make this a drug requiring FDA pre-approval. Non-homologous use means using a biological product of a certain kind that is not homologous (not the same or similar in origin) to the tissue being treated. For example, fat is not the same as the brain or other central nervous system tissue that is involved in several of the conditions on the clinic menu. Same goes for cardiac muscle, airways, etc.
The use of a non-FDA approved product in a largely non-homologous manner increases risks for patients. Note that these stem cell transplants are also very expensive with little evidence in the way of published data of benefit.
The CSN stem cell clinic in Sacramento will be located at the New Body MD Surgical Center, just about 10 minutes from my office. I plan on paying them a visit at some point. Let’s see how that goes. Will they let me in? (LINK) — 07/10/2015
Clean Bill for Aristotle University? Suit Says State Dropped Closure Order
School founder Xanthi Gionis was subject to bad press while running for state Senate seat in South Bay.
Two months after suing state agencies and officials for $21 million, the co-founder of Carlsbad’s Aristotle University says private school regulators have dropped their closure order.
Xanthi Gionis, the shuttered school’s former co-owner, filed an amended lawsuit in Sacramento federal court Thursday that declares the California Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education has “withdrawn all disciplinary actions.”
On June 21, the BPPE officially withdrew its action ordering the school to immediately cease operations and pay a $50,000 fine, “which could have increased to a half a million dollars or more,” Gionis said Friday via email.
Russ Heimerich—a spokesman for the agency as well as one of many defendants in the suit—said Friday that “she’s partly right.”
He said the citation and abatement order of May 2, which included the fine for operating without bureau approval, was withdrawn for a “technical reason” he couldn’t immediately specify.
But he said another citation is forthcoming.
“Stay tuned,” he said in a phone interview. “We haven’t dropped anything. There will be more from us.”
Contacted by phone Friday, Gionis said there’s been “zero investigation” of her former school. “If I was in their shoes, I’d be looking for a way out (too).”
Asked later whether the school could reopen, Gionis said: “Unfortunately, I cannot comment on that at this time.”
In a 23-page amended complaint, San Francisco-based attorney Keith Oliver repeated that Gionis’ damages are “substantial and irreparable.”
Get free real-time news alerts from the Carlsbad Patch.SUBSCRIBE
“While the actions of the state and its public officials were clearly improper, the bureau has at least taken the first step to repair the damage done to Ms. Gionis and Aristotle University,” Oliver said in a statement. “It would be prudently appropriate for the other parties involved in this case to do the same.”
Gionis is continuing to sue state officials, state Sen. Mark Wyland of Carlsbad (said to have called Aristotle a “diploma mill”) and a nurse who claims to have taught at Aristotle’s School of Public Health.
In fact, Gionis won a three-year civil harassment restraining order against the nurse, Karin Tausan, whose behavior was “beyond outrageous” and included false allegations against her and frightening contacts with her family, Gionis said in a phone interview.
And Tausan never taught at Aristotle, Gionis said.
Now living in San Carlos near the north end of Lake Murray, the former Chula Vistan is fighting to regain her reputation after dealing with bad press while running as a Republican for state Senate seat in the South Bay.
In early February, Gionis held a press conference outside San Diego City Hall to rebut allegations about Aristotle University that she called “horrifically false” and “politically motivated.”
She responded to an NBC San Diego report that found the university—which operated at times at 6185 Paseo Del Norte and 701 Palomar Airport Road—wasn’t certified with the state and lacked a city business license.
She slammed what she called “reckless reporting” by NBC San Diego, which she called “an alleged investigative report that is full of erroneous, easily verifiable information.”
In its May 2 citation, the former chief enforcement official for the state agency, Connie Bouvia, said: “You must also refund all monies (tuition and fees) to all students that were enrolled at Aristotle University after Jan. 1, 2010.”
Bouvia ordered Gionis to provide a list of those students, contact information and tuition they either paid or were refunded.
But Gionis said she had a conversation with Bouvia in which the agency enforcement chief conceded that Aristotle was licensed to operate through April 2015.
“She [Bouvia] admitted it and said she would work something out for me—those were her exact words,” Gionis told Patch.
Bouvia later left the agency and now works for the Contractors State License Board, according to her LinkedIn profile. (LINK) — 07/19/2013
FDA Warning Letter to Irvine Stem Cell Treatment Center Clinics Across US
The FDA has sent a Warning Letter to the Irvine Stem Cell Treatment Center. The leader of Irvine Stem Cell Treatment Center is Dr. Thomas Gionis and the letter was addressed to him. Interestingly, this letter, dated December 30, 2015, contains redactions.
At one time this clinic was part of the larger Cell Surgical Network (CSN) chain of clinics, but it seems it is no longer listed on the CSN website. You can see, however, that Gionis and Irvine are listed on this archived page from the CSN website.
Both publicly and on this blog, CSN in the past argued that it doesn’t need FDA approval for its stem cell product or its use (here, here and here), but recent FDA draft guidances imply otherwise in my opinion. Note that this new Warning Letter does not mention CSN.
This is post number one in a series on the breaking news on this development.
A Warning Letter is a serious form of FDA action. For instance, the Texas stem cell clinic Celltex received one and later moved its clinical operations to Mexico in part as a result. It’s unclear at this time what impact if any the Warning Letter will have on Irvine Stem Cell Treatment Center (note that it has multiple locations in NY, CA, and FL, each mentioned in the letter), but it’s definitely bad news for the clinics in my view.
The Letter outlines three major areas of problems:
- (1) the adipose stem cell product being used (stromal vascular fraction or SVF) is an unapproved biological drug
- (2) non-homologous use of the product
- (3) more than a dozen specific problems related to the production of the stem cell product SVF at the Irvine facility that the FDA termed, “a number of significant objectionable conditions”.
All three general areas of issues are serious.
The first two problems related to the FDA defining the SVF as a drug product and its use in what the FDA calls a nonhomologous fashion probably will have the broadest impact across the US. More than one hundred clinics use SVF in the US without having any FDA approval or licensing, and they use it in similar ways to Irvine that are likely to be deemed nonhomologous use as well.
As a result, this Warning Letter should be a wakeup call to these clinics. Despite the quietness of the FDA in the last two years on stem cell clinics, this could indicate a period of greater activity has begun.
The section defining the SVF as a drug in the letter is this one, emphasis mine:
“Your SVF product is intended to treat a variety of diseases and conditions, including, but not limited to, autism, Parkinson’s disease, pulmonary fibrosis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), multiple sclerosis (MS), cerebral palsy, and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), and is therefore a drug under section 201(g) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) [21 U.S.C. 321(g)] and a biological product as defined in section 351(i) of the Public Health Service Act (PHS Act) [42 U.S.C. 262(i)]. It is also a human cell, tissue, or cellular and tissuebased product (HCT/P) as defined in 21 CFR 1271.3(d).”
The relevant section on non-homologous use:
“In addition, your SVF product fails to meet 21 CFR 1271.10(a)(2)’s criterion that the HCT/P be “intended for homologous use only, as reflected by the labeling, advertising, or other indications of the manufacturer’s objective intent.”
The other dozen or so issues with the production and the facility practices of Irvine Stem Cell Treatment Center are quite significant as well in my view and include sterility practices.
The FDA inspected several Irvine Center clinic locations, but apparently not the one that seemed to kinda pop up last year in my neighborhood here in Sacramento. I’m not sure if this local one exists currently.
Irvine has responded to some ongoing issues raised related to the series of inspections, but not sufficiently says the FDA. Notably, the section on responses included this partially redacted phrase:
“you have terminated your relationship with the (b)(4)“.
I wonder if this refers to CSN? Hard to know.
Even though this Warning Letter does not mention CSN, the issues raised therein are in my view likely to be at least somewhat of interest to active CSN clinics too. I’m planning to contact CSN leadership to ask for a reaction to the letter and clarify whether CSN and Irvine are indeed no longer affiliated as would seem to be the case.
Irvine has only a few more days left of the 15 day response period to address the concerns raised by the FDA.
Stay tuned for more on this breaking news in follow up posts. This is a long Warning Letter with much to think about in it. (LINK) — 01/12/2016
Content Wiped on Websites of Stem Cell Clinics Warned by FDA
A couple of months back, the FDA issued a warning letter to three co-owned stem cell clinics selling fat stem cell-based interventions to patients for a variety of ills.
You can read all about the warning letter here. It went to lead clinic, Irvine Stem Cell Treatment Center as well as the two co-owned clinics, which are Manhattan Regenerative Medicine and Miami Stem Cell Center. Dr. Thomas Gionis was the person to whom the letter was addressed.
Irvine seems to have taken down its website content in the last week or two (see image above). The same is the case at Manhattan Regenerative Medicine, while Miami Stem Cell Center’s page remains up as of now. To me this suggests some change is in the air.
Many questions have been raised by the FDA warning letter including why this particular set of three clinics were warned, when others seemingly doing just about the exact same thing have not been warned, at least that we know of so far.
Stay tuned for more on Irvine and Miami Stem Cell Centers probably in the next week or so. (LINK) — 03/08/2016
