Whether the Virginia Board of Medicine violated the Full Faith and Credit Clause by declaring a physician a convicted felon based on a felony charge that was dismissed with prejudice in Colorado, whether the Board had subject matter jurisdiction to make such a determination, whether the Board's actions violated due process and double jeopardy, and whether the Board exceeded its statutory authority and modes of procedure

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1) Did the Court of Appeals of Virginia err in holding moot and failing to rule substantively on Clowdis’ claim that the Virginia Board of Medicine violated Full Faith and Credit by declaring him a convicted felon based upon a felony charge in a Colorado Criminal Court that was dismissed with prejudice? 2) Did the Court of Appeals of Virginia err by holding ambiguously either that: (a) the Virginia Board of Medicine had subject matter jurisdiction as an Administrative Court to declare Clowdis a convicted felon even though no criminal court ever convicted him of a felony; or (b) that Clowdis waived his right to object to the lack of subject matter jurisdiction making it “law of the case” when Clowdis did not appeal within 30 days of the Board’s initial unilateral suspension of his license in 2007? 3) Did the Virginia Court of Appeals err by upholding, due to sovereign immunity, the Virginia Board of Medicine’s unilateral expansion of its modes of procedure to act beyond the limits which the Virginia legislature has statutorily authorized? 4) Did the Virginia Court of Appeals err by alternatively applying “law of the case” and/or sovereign immunity to permit the Virginia Board of Medicine to permanently evade substantive judicial review of Clowdis’ repeated claims of constitutional and statutory violations, including his Fourteenth Amendment due process rights? ii RULES 24.1(B) AND 29.6 STATEMENT Pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 24.1(b), petitioner William G. Clowdis, Jr., MD states that all