Error under setup in line 9 - can someone help?

I have a similar issue

module Main where

import Token
import UserAdmin

import Daml.Script

setup : Script ()
setup = script do
  alice <- allocatePartyWithHint "Alice" (PartyIdHint "Alice")
  bob <- allocatePartyWithHint "Bob" (PartyIdHint "Bob")
  charlie <- allocatePartyWithHint "Charlie" (PartyIdHint "Charlie")
  userAdmin <- allocatePartyWithHint "UserAdmin" (PartyIdHint "UserAdmin") 

  aliceIssuer <- submit userAdmin do 
    createCmd Issuer 
        userAdmin = userAdmin 
        issuer = alice 

  originalToken <- submit alice do 
    exerciseCmd aliceIssuer MintToken 
        description = "Cat Pic 1"
        initialPrice = 100.00
        currency = "USD" 
        royaltyRate = 0.05

  bobOffer <- submit alice do 
    exerciseCmd originalToken Offer 
        newOwner = bob 
        price = 200.00 

  bobRequest <- submit bob do 
    createCmd OwnerRequest 
        userAdmin = userAdmin 
        owner = bob 
        reason = "I've got connections"

  bobOwner <- submit userAdmin do 
    exerciseCmd bobRequest GrantOwnerRights

  charlieRequest <- submit charlie do 
    createCmd OwnerRequest
        userAdmin = userAdmin 
        owner = charlie 
        reason = "FOMO" 

  charlieOwner <- submit userAdmin do 
    exerciseCmd charlieRequest GrantOwnerRights

  (bobToken, _, _) <- submit bob do 
    exerciseCmd bobOwner AcceptTokenAsNewOwner
        offerId = bobOffer

  charlieOffer <- submit bob do 
    exerciseCmd bobToken Offer 
        newOwner = charlie 
        price = 300.00 

  submit charlie do 
    exerciseCmd charlieOwner AcceptTokenAsNewOwner
        offerId = charlieOffer

  return ()

Can you share the error message you are seeing?

: Script ()
Defined at /Users/kr.aalle/Desktop/new_nft/nft/daml/Main.daml:9:1

Script execution failed on commit at Main:21:20:
  Attempt to fetch or exercise a contract not visible to the reading parties.
  Contract:  #0:0 (UserAdmin:Issuer)
  actAs: 'Alice'
  Disclosed to: 'UserAdmin'

Ledger time: 1970-01-01T00:00:00Z

Partial transaction:

Committed transactions: 
  TX 0 1970-01-01T00:00:00Z (Main:15:18)
  │   disclosed to (since): 'UserAdmin' (0)
  └─> create UserAdmin:Issuer
        userAdmin = 'UserAdmin'; issuer = 'Alice'Script

All contracts used in a Daml transaction must be visible to the submitter or more precisely the union of actAs and readAs parties. In your example it looks like the Issuer contract is only visible to userAdmin (probably they are the only signatory and there are no observers?) but you’re trying to use it in a submission which only has alice as the reading party.

There are two ways to fix this:

  1. Make alice an observer on the contract by adding the issuer of the Issuer template as an observer.
  2. Add the userAdmin as a readAs party so switch to submitMulti [alice] [userAdmin]. While this is convenient in tests, in a real system getting the authority from the userAdmin to let Alice see all of their contracts can be tricky.

Based on the information you shared 1 seems like the best option.

Thank you for the response. I am using the same exact code as shown and shared in the Episode 3 of Daml introductory training. Was wondering why I am looking at this error!!

Could you point me to the video and the source code you used? The reason I ask is that, as far as I can see, the code in Introduction to Daml video tutorial series available from this link and in the Github repo, which those series reference, uses deprecated but still supported “controller … can” syntax in choices, which implicitly adds choice controller as an observer on the template. Thus, if you use the templates code from the videos or from the referenced Github repo, you shouldn’t get the error in the Daml Script that you experienced. I would expect to see this error only if you updated the templates by replacing the deprecated “controller … can” syntax with the “choice …” syntax. And if that’s what you did, then, as @cocreature advised, the fix is to explicitly add the choice controller as an observer on the template (unless the controller is a signatory).
Does this make sense? Please, let me know if you need additional help.