Does a Federal Bankruptcy Judge deny the debtor's procedural and substantive due process by holding the debtor responsible for the Bankruptcy Attorney's self-admitted mistakes, thereby dismissing a correct bankruptcy petition?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW Whitney N. Broach, a citizen, has been barred from The United States Bankruptcy Court anywhere in the United States through no personal fault. The plaintiffs husband : had medical problems, and the plaintiff wished to pay off debts in a Chapter 13.This case presents a clear and intractable conflict regarding important Questions of Federal Bankruptcy Laws, and the Fifth and Fourteenth Constitutional Amendments. These questions affect the 94 Federal Judicial Districts that handle the 12,775,578 bankruptcies that are in the Federal Courts at any one time. In 2015, The Kaiser Foundation found that medical bills made 1 million adults declare bankruptcy (reported May 6, 2018). Fifty two million U.S. adults struggle to pay : medical bills, and represent 26% of Americans aged 18-64. : Bankruptcy Filings nationwide are on the rise. When ; debtors do not pay their creditors, the financial hardship causes bankruptcies to increase and affects millions of . people. The way these questions are answered will affect the quality of life of millions of people. 1) Does a Federal Bankruptcy Judge (who has required ; the debtor to employ a Board Certified in Consumer Bankruptcy Attorney) deny the debtor’s procedural due process of law and substantive due process by holding the debtor responsible for the Bankruptcy Attorney’s self admitted mistakes, thereby dismissing a correct in form, and in content bankruptcy petition? 2) Does a Bankruptcy Court Judge deny the debtor’s substantive and procedural due process, by treating the Debtor's Fed.R. Civ.P. 60(b)(1) “Excusable Neglect” Argument in a Motion for Rehearing by unilaterally and improperly converting Debtor’s 60(b)(1) motion to a Fed.R.Civ.P. 59 motion, and thereby depriving the debtor of a rehearing? iW