I went to David Kleiman after hearing advertising that was completely false. The advertising said a price that was at least half of what they wanted from me after going there for an exam. There is nothing special about the lasik I need and they are complete liars, yes Dr. David Kleiman is a liar. You can see through the whole process what they are up to and at the end they tell me the procedure is going to cost almost 5000 dollars after advertising less than half of that. David Kleiman is not a good doctor I hope other people will know what to do when they hear of him.

2. Respondent is certified by the American Board of Medical Specialties in ophthalmology.

3. Respondent is forty-six (46) years of age.

4. Respondent has been licensed to practice by the Board for approximately twenty (20) years.

5. In 1988, Responded failed to obtain an x-ray in regard to patient N.Y. to detect the possibility of a foreign metal object.

6. Patient N.Y. had faint evidence of rust at the time Respondent performed the initial examination, but elected not to perform an x-ray given the quietness of the eye. Respondent’s index of suspicion was also low given the lapse of time between the injury and the time of his examination 5 days later after evaluation by a previous physician.

7. Patient R.B. was examined by Respondent for trauma associated with a pencil strike to the eye.

8. Respondent administered a retrobulbar anesthesia by injection on patient R.B. that resulted in orbital hemorrhage and severe damage to the eye.

9. Respondent was aware at the time of examination that patient R.B. had a possible paternal history of Von Willebrand’s disease. Given his concern for the risk of infection however, and the fact that the patient’s father had two previous surgeries without complications, Respondent proceeded with the retrobulbar anesthesia prior to initiating clotting factor studies.

10. Respondent failed to assemble properly the equipment to perform a laser keratotomy and the resulting procedure on patient M.M. resulted in a corneal laceration and visual damage.

11. Respondent admits the improper assembly was the result of being tired and overworked.

12. Respondent has cooperated with Board staff in the investigation of the allegations related to this Agreed Order.

13. Prior to the Board investigation, Respondent voluntary took remedial action in regard to his practice including reducing his overall patient load and office hours, the hiring of additional ophthalmologists and clinical staff, and the referral of patients when appropriate.

14. Respondent has not previously been the subject of any action by the Board.