PREAMBLE # I: JURISDICTION

I, Dr. Lakshmi Arunachalam, a Woman, one of We, The People, of the State of California and of the United States of America, and inventor of the Internet of Things — Web Apps displayed on a Web browser — in This Common Law Court of Record, Order The Supreme Court of The United States to Enforce The MANDATED PROHIBITION Against Repudiating Government-Issued Patent Contract Grants as Delineated in Fletcher V. Peck (1810), Trustees Of Dartmouth College V. Woodward (1819), Grant V. Raymond (1832), U.S. V. American Bell Telephone Company (1897), Ogden V. Saunders (1827) — Governing Supreme Court Precedents — The Supreme Law of The Land And Law of The Case — And Stop All Wrongdoers And Respondents from Breaching Their Solemn Oaths of Office And Making It Hazardous, Expensive And Burdensome for Me to Have Access to The Court In Violation of Due Process, All In Violation of The Constitution, Entitling Me To Constitutional Redress, As Per Alp Vol. 12. Const . Law, Ch. Vii, Sec. 1> §141.

I, Dr. Lakshmi Arunachalam, a Woman, Order The Supreme Court of The United States To Take This Case Under Original Jurisdiction, As The Entire Judiciary Has Lost Jurisdiction By Breaching Their Solemn Oaths of Office. Their Orders are Void. You Wrongdoers and Respondents of the Supreme Court of the United States lost vour jurisdiction bv breaching vour solemn oaths of office and therefore, are not the tribunal. — I am the tribunal. I am the only Woman who has jurisdiction to rule on mv case(s) . The judgment is void for want of jurisdiction. This Court has no jurisdiction, because the Respondents failed to apply that a grant is a contract which the grantor cannot vacate. What other tribunal is there to exercise this jurisdiction? This is now a common law court. I am the claimant. I am the tribunal of the Court. I am the prosecutor in this Court .

I, Dr. Lakshmi Arunachalam, a Woman, Order the Wrongdoers and Respondents to stop imposing artificial procedures after losing jurisdiction and to stop avoiding enforcing the MANDATED PROHIBITION against repudiating Government-Issued Patent Contract Grants as delineated in Fletcher and Governing Supreme Court Precedents .

I, Dr. Lakshmi Arunachalam, a Woman, hereby Order that enforcing the MANDATED PROHIBITION against repudiating Government-Issued Patent Contract Grants as delineated in Fletcher and Governing Supreme Court Precedents — the Supreme Law of the Land and Law of the Case — is the sole issue and undisputed material fact and Law, integral to all of mv cases and prima facie evidence of the validity of all of mv claims .

Whether the Supreme Court should enforce the mandated prohibition against repudiating government-issued patent contract grants as delineated in governing Supreme Court precedents