1. WHETHER A CAREER OFFENDER WHO PROVIDED SUBSTANTIAL ASSISTANCE WHOSE SENTENCING JUDGE-VARIED FROM THE INITIAL INTRODUCED CAREER OFFENDERS IS THE JUDGE'S CONCLUDED GUIDELINE RANGE THE NEW STARTING GUIDELINES POINT FOR PURPOSES OF AMENDMENT 782 (minus two levels) PARALLELED WITH UNITED STATES V. HUGHES, 138 S. Ct. 1765, 1776-77 (2018) THUS ELIGIBLE UNDER 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) FOR CONSIDERATION FOR THE MINUS TWO LEVELS?

DOES HUGHES', Id., HOLDING APPLY TO CASES WHERE THE SENTENCING JUDGE VARIED FROM THE INITIAL INTRODUCED CAREER OFFENDER GUIDELINE RANGE OR CATEGORY BASED ON SUBSTANTIAL ASSISTANCE AND SETTLED IN A LOWER GUIDELINE RANGE OR CATEGORY; IS THE CONCLUDED DEPARTED GUIDELINE RANGE OR CATEGORY THE DEFENDANTS' NEW STARTING POINT FOR PURPOSES OF THE MINUS TWO LEVELS UNDER AMENDMENT 782 GIVEN 18 U.S.C. § 3582 (c)(2) DOES NOT PROHIBIT REDUCTIONS BASED ON RETROACTIVE AMENDMENTS IN SUBSTANTIAL ASSISTANCE CASES?

Whether a career offender who provided substantial assistance is eligible for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) based on the judge's concluded guideline range rather than the initial career offender guideline range