Whether Congress had provided that in an American civilized federal court system a judge can use an unlimited discretion to outrageously discriminate against pro se

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED 1. (a): Whether Congress had provided that in an American civilized federal court system a judge can use an unlimited discretion to outrageously discriminate against pro se, to cause pro se plaintiff irreparable injury, the federal/bankruptcy judge arbitrarily deny procedural due process by forcefully (in spite of plaintiff's protests) arbitrarily draft his/her version of “Amended Complaint Revised_and Edited Complaint” using copy and paste from certain portions of plaintiffs 2010 “Original Adversary Complaint,” favoring only defendants’ 5 years new evidence in support of order to granting their motions for summary judgment? (b): If so, whether a federal/bankruptcy judge abused his/her equitable powers under 11 U. S. C. § 105? (e): If so, or not, whether a federal/bankruptcy judge has discretion to forbid a plaintiff from amending his own complaint once as matter of course (Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a)&(b) after filing an adversary complaint, and/or whether such a judge may amend the complaint for the pro se plaintiff? (d): Whether the bankruptcy court properly or unfairly : exercising its equitable powers by staying the bankruptcy case for 5 years (until 2015) when the state action was already over 5 years earlier (in May 2010) and was never litigated, was the delay was intentional to allow the Circuit Court to create a new compromising case (In Mwangi v. Wells Fargo Bank (In re Mwangi), 764 F.3d 1168, 1170-71 (9th Cir. Aug 26, 2014)? (e): If so, whether the bankruptcy court had properly delayed the federal/bankruptcy case for 5 years ignoring 28 U.S. Code § 158. (d)(2)(D), which clearly states: “An appeal under this paragraph . does not stay any proceeding of the bankruptcy court, the district court, or the bankruptcy appellate panel from which the appeal is taken...”? (f):: Whether debtor’s evidence in possessing of a certificate of title (“Pink-Slip”) as a pecuniary "party-in-interest" as defined under 11 U.S.C. § 1107 investing security interest in the “Pink-Slip” as if a “debtor in possession” entitled him/her to be heard on punitive damages under § 1109(b), . as compared to a creditor’s promissory note to the security interest who had initiated a wrongful repossession and refused turnover?; (h): If so or not, whether a federal/bankruptcy judge discretion to deny debtor offering such evidence of ownership of security interest vested in the “Pink-Slip” instead of revested according to In Mwangi v. Wells Fargo Bank (In re Mwangi), 764 F.3d 1168, : 1170-71 (9th Cir. Aug 26, 2014)? (i): Whether a federal/bankruptcy judge has discretion to deny punitive damages while condoning defendants’ fraud after they submit a fake “Pink. Slip” as evidence, and falsely claiming in their motion to lift the automatic stay (on April 23, 2009 granted) to have it in their possession? 2. (a): Whether when a federal court denial of abstention without prejudice was appealable in the Circuit Court from any "final judgment, order, or decree of a bankruptcy judge" under 28 U.S.C. §158(a) & §158 (d)? And If so, does forum motions to abstain denied without prejudice are reviewable under 28 U.S.C. 2 Petition For Writ of Certiorari Avram Moshe Perry v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, NA., Key Auto Recovery LLC. §1334u, “(Any decision to abstain or not to avstain made under subsection (c) (other than a decision not to abstain in a proceeding described in subsection (c)(2)”) is reviewable by appeal under section 158(d), 1291, or 1292 of this title or by the Supreme Court of the United States under section 1254 of this title?” (b): If so or not, does abstention involve the abdication of federal jurisdiction” after the state causes of action were bifurcated and the state case was no longer “pe