most natural reading’’ of statute making it a crime “ ‘knowingly or intentionally ... to manufacture, distribute, or dispense, or possess with intent to manufacture, distribute, or dispense, a controlled substance’ ’’ requires government to prove “that the defendant knew he was dealing with ‘a controlled substance’ ’’ (alteration in original) (quoting 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1))). 26 Martinez, 135 S. Ct. 2798 (vacating and remanding to the Court of Appeals for further consideration in light oí Elonis); United State v. White, 810 F.3d 212, 220 (4th Cir. 2016) (“Elonis abrogates our prior holding that liability under [18 U.S.C.] § 875(c) can turn solely on how a recipient would interpret a statement, without regard to whether the speaker intended it as a threat’’); Houston, 792 F.3d at 667 (<HOLDING>); Nicklas, 713 F.3d at 440 (no First Amendment
holding that a federal court must order arbitration once it is satisfied that an agreement for arbitration has been made and has not been honored holding the same where the term conviction refers to a defendant who has been found guilty of a listed offense but has not yet been sentenced holding if there has been no termination of employment there has been no layoff or reduction in force holding that cage has not been made retroactive by the supreme court holding that jeffries has been abrogated by elonis