RIC N/A Unpublished Mule?

Æ Dupondius, 9.10g
Rome mint, 85 AD
Obv: IMP CAES DOMIT AVG GERM COS XI CENS PER P P; Head of Domitian, radiate, r., with aegis
Rev: MONETA AVGVST; S C in field; Moneta stg. l., with scales and cornucopiae
RIC -. BMC -. BNC -.
Acquired from Ken Dorney, January 2022.

An oddity for sure. Here we have a dupondius obverse paired with a Moneta reverse type which was an exclusive reverse to the As issues. I wrote to Ian Carradice co-author of RIC II.1 for his opinion. He writes - "I'm not sure about this coin. An official mint mule is certainly not out of the question, though it's a pity the end of the reverse inscription ..POT.. or ..PER.. is unclear, so I'm not sure which issue it would belong to? But also, I'm not sure if it really is official. The obverse has a good enough style, but the missing portion of the inscription suggests a large cut in that part of the die. Meanwhile, the reverse has a rather clumsily executed Moneta, with bizarre drapery (contrasting with the usually excellent style of AD 85). The reverse legend is also incomplete, so would render it difficult to catalogue (and that would be futile if it is 'barbarous').
The coin is certainly a curiosity, but that is about all I can say for it."

Curtis Clay on the other hand believes it most likely to be a mule: "I am inclined to think it's official. It would be interesting if another coin could be located struck from the same obv. and/or rev. die.
The weight is not impossible. Cf. BM 311 (8.85g, worn), BM 363A (8.84g), BM 366A (9.39g), BM 402 (8.50g)."

Now with the piece in hand I can confirm the obverse reading as 'PER', making the reverse reading as AVGVST which places this coin in the third issue of 85. Both the obverse and reverse styles look official to my eyes. However, the low weight does give me pause. The metal appears to be orichalcum.

Until another specimen surfaces with clearer legends I'll catalogue this as a possible mule. A curiosity indeed.