Whether a federal judge or justice condones fraudulent misrepresentation, perjury, disregard of the rule of law, denial of newly discovered evidence, and rulings based on public policy or public clamor

QUESTION PRESENTED In the present case before the Court, the question is asked if a federal judge or justice condones the following items: 1) a fraudulent misrepresentation to a federal court and the outright perjury on the part of a while under oath with said acts having a direct influence on the legal rights of the and the outcome of a case before a court; 2) the total disregard of the “Rule of Law’, either those of the State of Utah found in the Utah Code or the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; 3) denying Appellant/Plaintiff the right to present “newly discovered” evidence; and 4) that a federal district court judge may, at will, make a ruling based upon “public policy” or “public clamor” which violates Canon 3(A)(1), of the Canons of Ethics according to Judiciary Policy, Volume 2: Ethics and Judicial Conduct, Part A: Codes of Conduct which states that a judge should be faithful to, and maintain professional competence in, the law and should not be swayed by partisan interests, public clamor, or fear of criticism. As will be discussed in this Petition for Writ of Certiorari, this case began in the United States Federal District Court, for the District of Utah, Central Division and continued upon appeal to the United States Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals. Neither court has heard or ruled on the matters being presented in Petition but have ruled on other issues in this case which , decision was based upon the misrepresentation and misconduct of the