Whether the agreement/contract evidences an arbitration clause

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether the agreement/contract presented before the court evidences an “arbitration clause” (See...Doc. 75... Exhibits/Evidence Set CU.S. District Court Case No.: 2:17-ev-02170-BHH)? 2. Whether the lower court and the appeals court erred by overriding the agreement/contract by claiming “there is no valid arbitration clause” and by ignoring the delegation clause incorporated under the “Arbitration Clause” (See...Section III of the agreement/contract filed on the record in district court Doc. 75, Exhibits/Evidence Set C) simply by stating “there is no applicable arbitration clause” to deny the petitioner, the aggrieved party his right to compel arbitration and seek redress of grievance? 3. Whether the lower court and appeals court erred by completely and willfully ignoring the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) as written, 9 U.S.C. § 2 which permits an agreement in writing to be valid and enforceable when it involves commerce in fact and has a provision delegating an arbitrator to settle by arbitration any controversy thereafter arising out of such agreement/contract in writing, to submit to arbitration an existing controversy arising out of such a contract, transaction, or refusal as the agreement/contract clearly evidences (See...Section III of the agreement/contract filed on the record in district court Doc. 75, Exhibits/Evidence Set C)? Also whether congress has already passed a private law which they decided evidenced by their findings in section 2 of private bill No.: S -112/private law 114-31 (December 3, 2016) that agreements such as the one presented by the petitioner (See...Doc. 75... Petitioners Motion to compel Arbitration, page 2 -3 and Exhibits/Evidence Set CUSS. District Court Case No.: 2:17-cv-02170-BHH) is valid, binding on the parties, contained an alternative dispute resolution clause that provided for arbitration as the exclusive remedy for relief to the Parties, and the parties consented to arbitration? 4. Whether the lower court erred by denying Petitioner, Nelson L. Bruce his right to redress of grievance by denying his motion to compe! arbitration by failing to apply the law as written, the FAA and recently confirmed by this U.S. Supreme court, a higher * court, in their recent decision which states, a court has no business weighing in on the merits of the grievance’ by denying a party their right to redress of grievance, right to arbitration when the petitioner has dully exercised his right to redress of grievance, right to arbitration when the agreement is to submit all grievances to arbitration as the exclusive remedy, any and all disputes, any controversy or claim arising out of or relating in any way to this Agreement or with regard to its formation, interpretation or breach, and any issues of substantive or procedural arbitrability (See...Doc. 75... Exhibits/Evidence Set CU.S. District Court Case No.: 5. Whether the lower courts can override the U.S. Supreme court’s unanimous decisions, which determined in 2019 that a court has no business determining whether the parties entered into an agreement/contract in writing or if the agreement/contract is valid or not when the agreement delegates these questions to an arbitrator evidenced by the “Arbitration Clause” and is an arbitral issue and raises an arbitrability question, “Henry Schein, Inc. v. Archer and White Sales, Inc., No. 17-1272 (U.S. Sup. Ct. Jan. 8, 2019)”? 6. Whether jurisdiction once challenged must be proven on the record otherwise any judgments or orders placed their after is void for want of jurisdiction? Page 2/30 : U.S.P.S Tracking No.: EE 332 880 794 US