Veteran and Medical Cannabis Advocate Ellen Brown Seeks Partnership with NCIA for DEA Rescheduling Hearing

Legal counsel representing the National Cannabis Industry Association (NCIA) has filed a motion to consolidate with Ellen Brown, a veteran and medical cannabis advocate, in the ongoing but delayed Schedule III rescheduling hearing. The motion, submitted on February 12 by Khurshid Khoja, founder of Greenbridge Corporate Counsel P.C., was directed to the Drug Enforcement Administration’s (DEA) chief administrative law judge, John J. Mulrooney.

This consolidation effort aims to strengthen Brown’s position in the administrative hearing process, which has faced setbacks due to an interlocutory appeal and procedural challenges. If Mulrooney grants the motion, Khoja plans to represent Brown pro bono. However, this agreement is contingent upon Brown’s expert witness, Dr. Marion McNabb, amending her testimony to align with NCIA’s expert witnesses.

Brown’s Pursuit of Consolidation: Strategic Moves to Maintain Designated Participant Status

Brown, a Massachusetts Cannabis Advisory Board appointee and U.S. Air Force veteran, has been actively engaged in the rescheduling debate. On February 11, she filed a motion with Mulrooney requesting additional time to formalize her partnership with NCIA, revise McNabb’s testimony, and submit an updated exhibit list.

In her motion, Brown explained that her consolidation with NCIA hinges on her ability to synchronize McNabb’s testimony with NCIA’s position. She emphasized the importance of this partnership, noting that the NCIA’s lead counsel had agreed to represent her at no cost due to her veteran status. While acknowledging the challenge of aligning testimonies, Brown expressed confidence that she could meet the necessary conditions if granted the opportunity to amend McNabb’s statements. Mulrooney approved her request, extending the deadline until March 14 to complete the required steps for consolidation.

Dr. Marion McNabb’s Role in the Schedule III Hearing Process

Dr. Marion McNabb, a public health expert with a master’s and doctorate in the field, has conducted extensive research on medical cannabis usage patterns. As Brown’s approved witness, McNabb’s testimony could influence Mulrooney’s recommendation on whether the DEA should follow the Department of Justice’s proposed rule to reclassify cannabis as a Schedule III drug under the Controlled Substances Act. Given the significance of expert testimony in the hearing process, aligning McNabb’s statements with NCIA’s witnesses is a key requirement for Brown’s continued participation.

Background: Brown’s Legal Standing Challenges and Previous Consolidation Efforts

Brown was initially designated as one of 25 participants in the DEA’s Schedule III hearing process in October. However, in November, Mulrooney ruled that she lacked sufficient standing under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) to independently continue as a standalone participant.

As a result, Brown joined a consolidated group with the Connecticut Office of the Cannabis Ombudsman (OCO) and The Doc App, represented by attorney Matt Zorn of Yetter Coleman LLP. However, this partnership proved short-lived. OCO and The Doc App later withdrew from the proceedings entirely, and Zorn is no longer involved. Brown has since sought new legal representation and a more strategic alliance—leading to her current efforts to consolidate with NCIA.

Dispute Over Legal Representation: Brown’s Fallout with Former Counsel

Brown’s legal journey has been fraught with complications, including a dispute with her former attorney, Matt Zorn. Their professional relationship deteriorated after OCO filed a motion in early January requesting an interlocutory appeal over alleged ex parte communications between the DEA and anti-rescheduling participants. Brown opposed the appeal, leading to friction within her legal team.

In her February 11 filing, Brown provided an 11-page exhibit detailing her communications with Zorn, asserting that his failure to file a motion for reconsideration on her APA standing in November significantly impacted her case. She argued that had Zorn assisted her in properly addressing the APA standing criteria, she could have secured independent standing and avoided the need for consolidation with NCIA.

Mulrooney’s Ruling: Extending Brown’s Deadline but Dismissing Allegations Against Former Counsel

Despite the procedural setbacks, Mulrooney granted Brown’s latest motion on February 11, allowing her until March 14 to finalize her consolidation with NCIA. However, he dismissed the relevance of her claims against Zorn, stating that they did not influence his decision. His order emphasized that for the purposes of granting Brown’s extension request, her allegations were assumed credible but did not warrant further adjudication.

What’s Next for Brown and the NCIA in the Schedule III Hearing Process?

As Brown moves forward with her consolidation efforts, the next few weeks will be critical in determining her role in the rescheduling debate. If her partnership with NCIA is finalized, it could bolster the pro-rescheduling arguments presented during the hearing process.

For now, the rescheduling hearing remains in limbo due to the interlocutory appeal, but Brown’s persistence in securing her place underscores the high stakes involved. With the March 14 deadline approaching, all eyes are on the DEA’s administrative law judge to see whether Brown’s new legal strategy will keep her in the fight for cannabis reform.