Whether the First Circuit Court of Appeals erred in staying the appeal and requiring the appellant to seek relief from the automatic stay in the Title II court, thereby potentially cancelling the appellant's right to Supreme Court review

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED: with the content of the order(s) for which . | am seeking review 1. Ona letter dated September 18, 2019, the Clerk of the Court for the First Circuit, ; certified the Appeal 17-2105 status, and I quote: ; “In sum, your appeal remains pending before the court, but it is stayed pursuant to : the January 29, 2018 order. You will be advised promptly when the court issues any orders or makes any determinations regarding your appeal.” This Appeal was certified as having a double status, pending and stayed; because, Appeals that are pending, are not necessarily appeals that are stayed, and the meaning of the words pending and stayed is not the same; A stayed order from the Appellate Judges is a discretional order suspending the Appeal review; that is not allowed at a U.S. Court of Appeals; We have the Right to Appeal: unlike at the Supreme Court, where it is a Petition. 2. The Order from the Court of Appeals from January 29, 2018 Order, was an exact Order as the one from December 14 2017; But, last July 3, 2019, that same Order of Court of January 29, 2018, ; was amplified, with more specific details of what is going to happen and I quote the July 3, 2019 Order: ; “We are in receipt of multiple filings by plaintiff-appellant purporting to seek various forms of relief in this appeal. On January 29, 2018 the appeal was stayed pursuant to the automatic stay of the provisions of PROMESA 48 U.S.C. 2161 (a). On Oct. 10, 2018 this court declined to reconsider the stay order. If plaintiff wishes to seek relief from the automatic stay to pursue this appeal, he may do pursuant to the Title II court’s procedures. In the absence of relief granted by that court, the case will remain stayed.” If the Bankruptcy Court decides not to grant a relief, my Right to Appeal will be cancelled, and the Supreme Court will not have an Order and Mandate to decide ? The Appellate Judges are cancelling the Supreme Court intervention possibility, against Rule 10 and Rule 11 Supreme Court Rules Requirements. 3. My Appeal 17-2105 is for Unsupported findings or conclusion, and the correct Court to challenge the final judgment of the District Court is the Court of Appeals; Is not the Bankruptcy Court, where they are incorrectly ordering me to go. 4. This will happen more specifically, with Appeal 17-2105 at the Bankruptcy Court: First, | will be going there because an Order of the Court of Appeals, the highest court that had the chance to review this Appeal as my Right clearly establishes, but with a final judgment and opinion from a Magistrate Judge who dismissed my Case at the U.S. District Court for the District of Puerto Rico, against the evidence; Then, the Bankruptcy Court may grant or deny a relief in this Appeal, but the Bankruptcy Procedures, does not specifically include anything about the plaintiff-appellant having an Appeal pending at the correct Court of Appeals, for Unsupported findings or conclusion; The Bankruptcy Court will not review my Appeal 17-2105 for Unsupported findings or conclusion at all; Even the letters asking me to file at the Bankruptcy Court, clearly say the Case is going to be disputed; not reviewed for Unsupported findings or conclusion;. anywhere Appellate Judges are making the Bankruptcy Court the final court, and they can’t; . the final court is the Supreme Court, but if the relief is denied, that will not cancel the automatic stay of my Appeal and there will be no Mandate or Final Order from the First Circuit Court of Appeal, cancelling the possibility of a Supreme Court Review by Petition, and all that is against Rule 10, from the Supreme Court, specifically. 5. Chief Judge Howard, from the First Circuit, dismissed my Judicial Misconduct complaints, but without specifically including all the details of what took place; Chief judge Howard decided not to weigh the evidence, and just impose his opinion against the evidence, by means of their Guide to Judiciary Policy, ; updated last March 2019; Also, he ignor