Should an action based on multiple civil and criminal offenses be considered from the first instance, the last known instance, or after evidence of numerous or collective misbehavior?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Should an action based on multiple civil and criminal offenses be considered from the first instance? The last known instance of a transgression? Or, should it be after evidence of numerous or collective misbehavior showing an unmistakable pattern, illegality, and therefore a tort violation, not a frivolous filing, and worthy of a complaint? 2. Should a complaint with multiple actions be entirely dismissed when only one or two of the actions have been incorrectly considered by a lower court to be filed outside the statute of limitations? 8. Should a complaint have all actions unlawfully grouped together and judged as one without consensus from the Plaintiff? 4. Should a plaintiff be allowed to bring another complaint to the same court if the previous complaint was incorrectly dismissed with prejudice but with actions that are still viable and within statute? Should these actions involving the same parties and issues, but cannot be defined by prejudice against the Plaintiff as they are still valid and within statute, be barred from a new filing? 5. Should an invalid filing that violates CA Code of Civil Procedure Local Rule 7-8 (Kalivas v Barry Controls Corp., 49 Cal.App. 41,1996), which created an order, judgment, and dismissal, that is acknowledged to have been done so by the court, be allowed to stand? ii LIST OF ALL PROCEEDINGS Naora Ben-Dov v. Shoshana S. Sragow, et al U.S. District Court for Central CA, Santa Ana, Case No. 8:17-cv-00122-DFM_ Decision: November 8, 2017 (App. Al) Naora Ben-Dov v. Shoshana S. Sragow, et al Ninth Circuit Court Case No. 17-56807 Decision: August 15, 2018 (App. A6) Naora Ben-Dov v. Shoshana S. Sragow, et al Ninth Circuit Court Case No. 17-56807 Decision: January 8, 2019 (App. A8) Naora Ben-Dov v. Shoshana S. Sragow, et al United States Supreme Court Case No. 18A931