Did the second panel err in denying Muckle's motion to remand or recuse itself due to appearance of impropriety and Canon 8C

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Did the second panel, assigned to hear the appeal, err in denying Muckle’s motion to remand the case or recuse itself because it concerns the appearance of impropriety and Canon 8C of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges, after the first panel which heard the case vacated its judgment, recalled its mandate, reassigned the case, then recused themselves upon Muckle motion that the entire panel disqualify itself and vacate its judgment after it was discovered two years after their judgment that a member of the panel, Judge David Barron, who participated in the appeals court’s March 25, 2016 Judgment would have been required to recuse under Canon 3C(1)(c) of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges and 28 U.S.C. § 455(b)(4) due to a : financial interest in Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., a party to this case? 2. Did the Appeals Court err in affirming the district court’s order of dismissal of the complaint on the grounds that the complaint fails to state a plausible claim, Ashcroft v. Iqbal, upon which relief can be granted? 3. Did the First Circuit Court of Appeals err in disregarding Muckle’s arguments that the State defendant’s Eleventh Amendment right must give way to the Ninth Amendment? 4. Ifthe Ninth Amendment holds that the enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people, then isn’t the . Eleventh Amendment, which came on the heels of this Supreme Court ruling in Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 U.S. 419 (1793), construed to deny and disparage the rights of the people i. 5. to sue their local government for intentional constitutional violation and to abrogate the powers of the federal courts to safeguard against State’s assertion of monarchy-like prerogatives? il.