Whether the Lower Court erred in not admitting nexus evidence

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1, Whether the Lower Court erred in not admitting nexus evidence for administrative action taken under the jurisdiction of §§ 702 706 of the APA implemented under Pub. L. 106-398, § 1 [[div. A], title IX, § 904(a)(1)] Oct. 30, 2000, 114 Stat. 1654, 1654A-225, substantive law for emerging technology in 2014 and not applicable to the Tucker Act. 2. Whether ex parte communications fulfill libel and use of the secret code word in Respondent’s Official agency action Determination were arbitrary and capricious when reversing prior official agency action in 2014 for Technology Capability development. 3. Whether original claim had substantial evidence for causation under APA § 706. 4. Whether the Federal Question in the Appeal’s Court was summarily avoided using the Political or Major Question Doctrine with initial agency action substantial evidence was present in 2014 and subsequent 2015 adjudication contained unsupported slander with no evidence to exclude judicial analysis of the Petitioner’s Cause of Action. 5. Whether Chevron deference applies to a statutory interpretation question that determines both the lawfulness of agency action and, the court’s jurisdiction that excluded prima facie nexus evidence submitted into the record with affidavit. 13 t AS ( 1