Whether the replacement Circuit Panel repeatedly refused to address/clarify Jurisdiction issues, ultimately denying Petitioner's efforts to resolve a list of extraordinary, unresolved issues

QUESTIONS PRESENTED This request for Certiorari is respectfully sought after the ‘ : Petitioner’s efforts to resolve a list of issues, considered as “extraordinary”, were denied by the First Circuit replacement panel.! This list of extraordinary, unresolved issues — beginning with jurisdiction and as described in Applications 18A545, 18A554 and 17A1359 has now twice been acknowledged by ; Associate Justice Stephen Breyer, who last granted a timeline ; extension on December 4, 2018. Despite the legal complexity of issues, the Petitioner has been forced to represent himself as a pro se litigant, as requests for assistance with the appointment of counsel under 28 U.S.C. §1915 have also been repeatedly denied by the Replacement Circuit Panel without valid cause. The Petitioner is all but certain that if he was represented by : legal counsel, there would be additional claims to those described in this Petition. As a matter of record (here and in the related federal litigation2), the Petitioner has evidenced judicial failures and a continued “Pattern of Corrupt Conduct’ resulting in an unprecedented eight (8) federal recusals? ultimately impacting jurisdiction, issued orders, and in itself shows cause for this Court to grant Certiorari. The remaining questions following the jurisdiction issue(s) may then be considered moot. However, . ; considering the gravity of these issues and based on the Petitioner’s interpretation of the law — the (second) acknowledgment by Justice Breyer shows cause to include them as questions here. The questions presented are: 1. Whether the replacement Circuit Panel repeatedly ~ . refused to address/clarify Jurisdiction issues, ultimately 1 See