Whether the district court erred in granting summary judgment without weighing the evidence, disregarding interrogatories and evidence, and committing judicial misconduct

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED 1. Judge McGiverin wrote, a final judgment and opinion not based on the weigh of the facts, as he wrote, and that is an unsupported conclusion, ~ and | quote his Document 149, on page 2: “The court does not weigh the facts, but instead ascertains whether the “evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party.” But all the steps | followed, were based on the evidence and its weight. 2. On page 8, Judge McGiverin wrote, disregrading my Interrogatory, and all the evidence | submitted not only to the Court, but following all required previous steps, , that, and I quote the Judge false quote on Page 8 of Docket 149, first sentence: “Rosado did, in a way, address fact 11, which alleges that Santander has always reported Rosado’s accounts pursuant to the agreement.” This statement from the Judge is false, how can that be allowed? 3. By insisting precisely in what | took as Judicial Misconduct, from previous Judge Garcia Gregory, Judge McGiverin final opinion : dismissed the evidence: How a Court Judge decide, without counting the evidence, that the required Discovery requirements were not met? 4. Even at the 3 main credit bureaus, and through the C.F.P.B. their first lawyer, Mrs. Vanessa Mufioz Martinez, received all the evidence without missing anything, and she simply denied the bank was violating . the Fair Credit Reporting Act, but all evidence was received by her, before the Lawsuit: Discovery requirements took place also at C.F.P.B. 5. None of the credit bureaus reported my complaints as frivolous, or that there was no genuine dispute: it was the opposite, and | have the right to dispute inaccurate information reported: : Rule 10, Reasons (a),(c); Document 149 7/24/2019; Docket 155 7/26/2019 6. Is also Judicial Misconduct to pretend our education is not enough to see this egregious and hostile tactics, is an insult, but not even their Judicial Council weigh the facts? Rule 10, Reasons (a),(c); Guide to Judiciary Policy Document 149 7/24/2019; Docket 155 7/26/2019 7. All their insistence of accusing me, by Judges McGiverin and Garcia Gregory : but without the weigh of the evidence and against the evidence, of not following the Rules, when the fact is, Judges here are the ones not following the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, is because a Pro Se Plaintiff that complies with all, fast, and perfectly, is a threat to their Pro Bono Program? 8. Is the Pro Bono Program used as a way to make favors to their colleage attorneys? 9. If the Pro Bono Program is optional, then why a District Judge is allowed, by specifc Rules, to freeze our Case without even asking if we accept first ? 10. Judge McGiverin is practicing Retaliation: | filed Misonduct complaints, against Judges Garcia Gregory and Vélez Rive, who took the Case before him, because they are colleagues at the District Court of Puerto Rico? This same Case, arrived at the First Circuit as an Interlocutory Appeal, for Bad Faith and or Unnecessary delays, because Judge Garcia Gregory was trying to impose the Pro Bono Program. 11. Judge McGiverin is just presenting lots of words and arguments the evidence contradicts, to justify the unlawful actions of a multimillionaire bank, and that is Judicial Misconduct too: But Appellate Judges don’t see because is not included in their Guide to Judiciary Policy, no matter it does not have to? 12. Looking staright at the evidence, reminding Justices . Appellate Judges Guide to Judiciary Policy is not limited to what it is included on it, this same Case and Appeal under Petition, ; looks the opposite to Docket 149: why? 13. To misrepresent the facts and to deviate the attention from the evidence, . minimizing its importance was used, according to the evidence | brought to the Court, that the Judges decided not to weigh? by the Appellee, and their Attorneys? 14. Basically: Judge McGiverin dismissed the facts of the Case, exactly like the Judicial Council, and Chief Judge Howard at the Fi