Whether the petitioner was denied due process and equal protection under the law when the court denied the petitioner's motion to proceed in forma pauperis and ignored the petitioner's motion for restitution, and the court order made it impossible for the petitioner to pursue the case on the merits

No question identified. : Pei EOC fuer cusenen PRESENTED Vice employe on oF qdout oe foe ye above-nentl LT. was infoened by dpe production 5 evi Sr wi my p asrhen poove uP dy FiX® octly “ter ueds +t world for me fo petorn * work, pert wos time do the job LT ws dens ed the geo tuntly 4 L avlln4 a) Ti | * do the job. ; hee was He yeasen given 44 me foc He hehavio . to fuer st sh ard de oan assignment in Violadea of He jmeiot with Pigalle? Act of 176, 45 amended yg Order denying motion FP proces in Forma Pouptls 2) Motion g| lows bur responded to Jernostt wy pes titution be denoted by the petitioner. Orde 'gnoreS motion, 3) factor’ 79 14 fees and Couet costs Oder makes it , for hte to. win Lasé we “ posible peti Frenee merits and shill 6 attected negetivel y by brinyay the @ se. ) ° ¢) Orde viel petitions ght fa petition HH , gore fr a redress of grievances. €