May a court of appeals on de novo review refuse to decide a claim predicated on a failure of non-religious corporations to comply with neutral principles of corporate law

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Petitioners, the widow and three adult children of Siri Singh Sahib Harbhajan Singh Khalsa Yogiji, aka Yogi Bhajan, brought this lawsuit to require two corporations established and exclusively controlled by Yogi Bhajan to comply with their Articles and Operating Agreements and appoint Petitioners to their Boards, as is required by Oregon Corporate Laws. Yogi Bhajan’s trusted assistants who served on the Boards of the two entities when he died did not implement his plan of succession so that they could convert assets from those entities, and improperly withheld documents and information from Petitioners. The District Court ruled on summary judgment that Petitioners’ claims were barred under the First Amendment by the Ministerial Exception and Ecclesiastical Abstention doctrine and did not rule on any other issue. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, on de novo review, eschewed the First Amendment issues and instead ruled Petitioners’ claims were time-barred under the statute of limitations, weighing the evidence on disputed facts and making findings of fact at odds with the underlying evidence. 1. May a Court of Appeals on de novo review of summary judgment refuse to decide a claim predicated on a failure of two non-religious corporations, with religious affiliates, to comply with neutral principles of corporate law, when the sole basis for the District Court’s decision was that the Ministerial Exception and Ecclesiastical Abstention Doctrine barred the claim? i 2. May the Court of Appeals, on de novo review of a summary judgment, sua sponte weigh the evidence on disputed fact issues and make findings not supported by the record, in direct conflict with this Court’s ruling in American Pipe & Const. Co. v. Utah, 414 U.S. 538, 559, 94 S. Ct. 756, 769 (1974), to affirm on the ground of statute of limitations which was not granted by the District Court, to avoid deciding First Amendment issues properly before it? ii STATEMENT OF RELATED CASES The following Federal District Court and Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Cases are related to the matter before this Court: 1. Bibiji Inderjit Kaur Puri, et al. vs. Sopurkh Kaur Khalsa, et al., U.S.D.C., Dist. Or., Case No. 3:10-cv-01532 MO. Judgment entered April 26, 2018. 2. Bibiji Inderjit Kaur Puri, et al. vs. Sopurkh Kaur Khalsa, et al., Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, Appeal No. 18-35479, Memorandum Opinion issued December 23, 2019. 3. Bibiji Inderjit Kaur Puri, et al. vs. Sopurkh Kaur Khalsa, et al., Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, Appeal No. 13-36024, Opinion issued January 6, 2017. iii