Whether the First Circuit erred in concluding that one Count under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act was sufficient to confer Federal Jurisdiction over the Petitioner despite the lack of Federal Pre-emption over M.G.L.C. 93A, and in doing so erred in failing to Remand to State Court all in direct conflict with this Honorable Court's Decisions

QUESTIONS PRESENTED ; 1. Whether the First Circuit erred in concluding that one Count under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act was sufficient to confer Federal Jurisdiction over the Petitioner despite the lack of . Federal Pre-emption over M.G.L.C. 93A, and in doing so erred in failing to Remand to State Court all in direct conflict with this Honorable Court’s Decisions. 2. Whether the First Circuit erred in failing to Remand to State Court for lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction by refusing to apply the Mandatory Prior Exclusive Jurisdiction Doctrine, requiring Remand, espoused by this Honorable Court in direct conflict with this Courts mandate. 3. Whether the Petitioners Constitutional Right to Due Process and Equal Protection were violated . where the District Court in allowing the Respondent’s (Deutsche Bank) Counsel to verbally prove its case in open court (later determined as false) and ignoring the Petitioner’s documentary proof that Respondent, ~ Deutsche Bank, lacked Standing to Foreclose on | Petitioner's Home and therefore lacked standing in any action in any Court, and where the District Court rested its dismissal of Petitioner’s case based upon the verbal misrepresentation of the state of the Law in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts by Counsel to Deutsch Bank, that is the exact opposite of the Law of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. 4, Whether the 1st Circuit violated the Separation of Powers Federalism by interpreting a Massachusetts Statutes in opposite of the Supreme Judicial Court’s interpretation of the Statutes, thereby creating a distortion on the application of the Statutes in violation of the Separation of PowersFederalism, that has violated the rights of not only the Petitioner but also many citizens of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts similarly situated.