1. Whether there is subject matter jurisdiction under the applicable Pennsylvania
subject matter jurisdiction statute 204 Pa. Code § 85.3, given my status has remained retired
since 2018 until February 28, 2023 where my retired inactive license was placed on retired
inactive disability as reciprocal discipline for my conduct of petitioning the Delaware Courts to
sue former President Donald J. Trump in a Religious Freedom Restoration Act Law suit to
alleviate a substantial burden upon my religious exercise occurred in 2020-2021, which is
outside the scope of 204 Pa. Code § 85.3.

II. Whether there is statutory authority granting PA ODC authority to seek reciprocal
discipline at this time, as not ripe since reciprocal discipline does not fall under the
Pennsylvania's jurisdiction under 204 Pa. Code § 85.3 or the Pennsylvania Office of
Disciplinary's authority under Pa.R.D.E, Rule 201 (1)(3) or Pa.R.D.E., Rule 218 (a).

Ill. Whether there is an injury in fact to meet the element of standing under the facts
of this case.

IV. Whether the Order I seek to vacate remedies any harm, or whether it chills the
exercise of private fundamental rights including the First Amendment right to privately petition
to safeguard one's private personal religious belief in Jesus Christ

V. Whether Pennsylvania Office of Disciplinary Counsel's precedent will cause
unjust injury to formerly retired lawyers, the public and needless lawsuits glutting up the courts
by exceeding jurisdiction over formerly barred lawyers who

Whether there is subject matter jurisdiction under the applicable Pennsylvania subject matter jurisdiction statute