Can Ms. Patricia Solomon, a physician assistant who never prescribed any drug, be convicted under 21 U.S.C. §846 in the Eastern District of Kentucky London Division of conspiracy to distribute oxycodone a controlled substance not 'as authorized,' when the medicines were dispensed in accordance with valid prescriptions lawfully signed by a doctor under his prescribing authority capacity?

ISSUES PRESENTED FOR REVIEW As per Honorable Justice Breyer’s opinion in the new United States Supreme Court ruling XIULU RUAN v. UNITED STATES No. 20-1410. Argued March 1, 2022—Decided June 27, 2022; “a regulation provides that, “to be effective,” a prescription “must be issued for a legitimate medical purpose by an individual practitioner acting in the usual course of his professional practice.” 21 CFR §1306.04(a). We assume, as did the courts below and the parties here, that a prescription is “authorized” and therefore lawful if it satisfies this standard. Under the light of this Honorable Court, Can Ms. Patricia Solomon, a physician assistant who never prescribed any drug, be convicted under 21 U.S.C. §846 in the Eastern District of Kentucky London Division of conspiracy to distribute oxycodone a controlled substance not “as authorized,” when the medicines were dispensed in accordance with valid prescriptions lawfully signed by a doctor under his prescribing authority capacity? See Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, at 482 (1994) — establishing the basis for the damages claim necessarily demonstrates the invalidity of the conviction. Page 3 of 16