Whether Petitioners' procedural due process rights were violated

QUESTIONS PRESENTED A disqualified state court judge called in from vacation and delayed a temporary restraining order, then “self-requalified” himself back on to the case to enable the fiduciary fraudulent below market sale of a senior oceanside mobilehome park. The California Judiciary and Attorney General allowed The District Court and Ninth Circuit held Rooker-Feldman barred jurisdiction because the “fraud on the court” exception excludes fraud by the court. Petitioners moved to disqualify the District Court Judge for personal and collegial ties with the state court judges allegedly involved in the fraud. The questions presented are: Whether Petitioners’ procedural due process rights were violated by deprivation of federal remedy for state judiciary wrongdoing on decision that Rooker-Feldman “fraud on the court” exception did not apply because the state court judges were part of the fraud. Whether Petitioners have a federal action where state court judges denied procedural due process by acting to assure no impartial court and obstructing Petitioners’ inquiry into judicial misconduct. Whether Petitioners were denied due process when their motion to disqualify a District Judge for personal and collegial ties with local state court judges was decided under District Court General Order that did not comply with disqualification statute, 28 U.S.C. §455.