Issues being raised

No question identified. : Auestons Presented | llissnes “to be severed ond individually Mled | 0 03 t dismiss the. cesnting actlons individne Land deprive. such ClH2 en ey ope late. eres there by thoder the. RO A. ? Lt Does the Pl. RA. Oeeerate to bar appeals lof (ear Peadlac, at the Hme 3“ Strlkes” are fet ESperterly pet Sty ke" propriety from belng appealed? 32 Show d @ ciftzen ever~ be deprived of review ee lot Wron 4 doing by government actors involving cds [ £ cciminel RAtwre, Wlthowt ever= [oo ling ito fhe ro asserted in Such petition 2 . Ts Cana District court dismiss glecding os _ Lrvvelows efore Service_on oy defendants based on lo. Finding thet the gleadings assert wide spread sree es of just! Ce in Stote Comet proceeding st _ (5: Does the District cobrt enjoy Sfecll absplate oh clas(ye power te inval(date a PetsonerS right lbp geHHon the comrts wa fhe PU.GA, ¢ ™ . 6: Does the PURA Wolate egnel etect(on clause to suspect class oMertsoners | 7i What, 1F any, Hime IImits affect the — [Pe sar tel eta tf a oss /pefittion the | Cour is _for redress of gerclevad Injnry, | Go Does the Bye Strike undec the P.C.@A lgerme such Difret judge to exploit the | ororc ons the der 80 os fo afflict @ lo iHoner +o a Wrnalw Hird strilee which , [ee euttenes is helpless to _hxve resolved s — 9oWhen a cinzen les a new actlon in [Cederal Cort asserting thet mu fiple (sses | lin erevions Filings formaty dismissed for" Eelfare | tate a clafm” were in foct Subjected fo tesla actlons which establish pho octtons there | under to have heen asserted were as olfedced Lend hat wre & Inj wry Musafted directly afd Iconsegnentially, 25 wel (as incidentally, From those sch wrongs and the wrongs ul dental oF Federal interventlong lis fhe cout free to dismiss Sach asserHons pes Frivelons and unappedlable wa te PLRA.? [OTs it the erectice of this nation’s @reseat | | jovernment to ABT turn o bind eve +o other I overn mont actors’ CorrupHon tn plo faton of fe (YE Ammondin ent Sectlon AU) co clderablyTvecony | | | [fs welther ov not un rersonal Seveved elements | of one case [Las elec ble under “ERCiv (ra end X07 pean cessonolly constitute multiple Strikes against tee PLGA! | dhs welther this district court fs empower ee fio compel! this supreme Courts Clerk to Eile _ | nbhmitted actl, see hing on’ :ns/ herisdicHon. 43 Does Compl ance with direction Sof a VA Leon of£t als’ directons reasonably allot a court fo wse Sheh pro “Se pet [Honer fo be | subject to futher * Strikes " against ROCA (imfts | for Seeking phe erotectlen ot those luus lavelved, | | | 142 Does Ped. @Civi€ 17 reqwre o comp po le any (denttiable porty respons [ble when _a loro 90. pettoverr asserts an evident violator lof a [aw 9 constltetfonas grotecHon, or fs ft. a le cirnsed in dism(ssing the actHon as. frivelous a lor Zajlare_to State a clalm” $0 a5 fo char on stetke. Og Wrst PURA. reasonable des despfte leh eVdent Factual in jury sustained, 5} Even i€ the wet only acknowledges the wroogfnf Gudice eVidened in Warings Sworn ares (ntormeaHon thatch frais flicars ova. reapuslb | for clreul Tabane f vd _convictlon ; me, | iach cnn of ypraded bates int rmaftlons clrenflad (on 8S etl th | CAWING eresrdl CE Coagd rs prejvdic® amongst euch “Frate No ein vee cede exclusive reclolents of Sack nawunle ee | wouldnt but alone bew 2cbstantial of ; [opoinst Khe ¢ sete Sebstandfal 1Sme tote of Bifingis permitting : rae (SSKeS against sich gacly PAeing eff pies yinday FECP rate pig me Sitting rows’, eat a | testimony Cleary indicates eens [stute ent te ellis Sc —_ entered proceed) has copyed the pew to be raliple puch convictions of seperde oftenses of violence. oa officers, roan pee and iets rexdlloe from ogger | | naserln(nate use of dead “Cort 7 jy force, at Fhe : (ight Prevlevied +h ceeds coli A 7 not in sath Felony an const tub Lf salon =" fhnerlme nr CC kts anally lolsting my LG. Would n’ Ned t the senerel osserton of refinsal to ron aaa Cdr to thet yrejudte from4cfe onvit (on) Fron others vlole