Question not identified

Questions Presented 1. In the US Supreme Court Volume 408 Grayned v. City of Rockford, 408 U.S. 104 (1972) “The person cannot be declared a Frivolous (vexatious) litigant until after the court has conducted a hearing and given the opportunity to be heard. Can a federal court ignore the due process and the trespassing of Constitutional laws to declare a victim of violence vexatious? ; 2. This is a case 42 U.S.C. § 1983 filed in Appeals Court Ninth Circuit under the 28 U.S. Code § 1292 Interlocutory Decisions with excerpts of the district’s judge bias. However, the Appeals court 9th Circuit dismissed under the 9th Cir. R. 27-10. The appeals court rule stated deals with timely motions. The petitioner has kept an active litigation visible in Pacer. Can an erroneous court rule be above 28 U.S. Code § 1292? 3. Petitioner suffered physical and verbal assault in the workplace in April 2020, to this day petitionerhas been left injured without therapy and unpaid. Defendants have been deaf to the requests the petitioner has made in requesting to comply with the labor laws and safety laws. Employer (IHSS-DPSS) did not pay various months of wages to the petitioner, has refused to pay workers compensation , has refused to pay unemployment, and left the petitioner injured and unpaid. Employer did not call back the petitioner to work leaving the petitioner unemployed. All respondents in this case failed to assist an injured employee and refused to provide health care. Can Due Process (4th and 14 Amendment section 1), be denied to leave wage theft, Physical assault, defamation of the petitioner’s character, without punishment? Is a victim of wage theft, physical and verbal assault vexatious? 2 J. a ee Under the Gypsum Formula, The Supreme Court nO standard requires that the court of appeals breaks down the case and apply the appropriate standards to each component(each right violated) Meridian Bank v. Allen 958 F.2d 1226, 1229 (3rd Circ 1992). Can the Appeals Court 9th Circuit defeat the established Gypsum Formula and deaf to the assault suffered by petitioner? This is a plain Error of the court under U.S.C. Fed R Crim P Rule 52 5. Why was this case filed in the Superior Court of California during the petitioner’s leave for medical surgery between the months of July and august 2021? Petitioner never filed this case in a State court. The petitioner found notes of no appearance in the mail at the petitioner’s return from medical surgery. PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK BELOW | 3 iy 3