Where State law requires certified mail to be used for tax notices, is due process satisfied where the State instead only uses regular mail, which results in a taking without notice or hearing?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED , In 1970, this Court ruled in Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254, that due process requires proper notice and a hearing before a professional license may be taken; yet in 2016 the State of California seized nonresident Petitioner’s builder’s license admittedly without one single hearing whatsoever. California law requires taxpayers to request a hearing within 60 days of the mailing of the State’s tax assessment notice; but the same law also requires supervisory approval (in writing) and that tax notices be sent by certified mail. The State admittedly failed to follow these two provisions. Petitioner never received notice and was thereby prevented from requesting a hearing. Question 1 — Where State law requires certified mail to be used for tax notices (that start a 60 day countdown to a government taking), is due process satisfied where the State instead only uses regular mail, which results in a taking without notice or hearing? Question 2 — Did Respondent (and the appellate court) deprive Petitioner of procedural due process by conflating two California tax _ statutes together, thus allowing the State to circumvent mandatory chief counsel approval and justify a government taking without any hearing?