Did the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit err in upholding the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina's sanctions against Petitioner?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED , Did the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit err in upholding the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina’s | awarding more than $7,000 in fees-and-costs | sanctions against Petitioner for his alleged failure to attend a Nov. 9, 2020, deposition when (1) he had timely moved to dismiss his own case very early in the case due to his deteriorating health, (2) did so three weeks prior to opposing counsel’s issuance of notice of the deposition (the first in the case), (3) had notified opposing counsel in writing of his disagreement with , staging in-person depositions out of state six months into the global pandemic, (4) had agreed in writing with opposing counsel to suspend discovery pending judicial orders on nearly twenty (20) outstanding motions the judge had failed to decide, and (5) had already been ordered by a federal administrative judge, weeks before moving for voluntary dismissal under Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, to appear on the same date at the same time at a mediation settlement conference in his representation of a client of the petitioner’s in that client’s case against the U.S. Department of Defense or risk sanction per the terms of that administrative judge’s order (which conference Petitioner attended via Microsoft Teams from his home in D.C. and at which he settled his client’s case over the period in which the Petitioners’ counsel’s deposition of petitioner was staged)? Did the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit err in upholding the United States District | li Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina’s sanctioning Respondents only $500, not fees-andcosts sanctions, when half of the named defendants and their insurance carrier did not appear for the court-ordered mediation Settlement Conference of June 20, 2020 (which was held in the Petitioners’ own counsel’s local office in North Carolina), in violation of the court order that those three persons specifically appear? Did the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit err in upholding the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina’s denial of Petitioner’s motion for Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 sanctions as moot in an order granting voluntary dismissal without prejudice, fully aware for ten months that Petitioners’ defense counsel had impermissibly obstructed the $250,000 settlement between Petitioner and Respondents reached in September 2020, more than one month prior to the conjured-up, deposition? Did the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit err in refusing to address the issue plainly presented on appeal on remand (i.e, whether , Petitioner’s case should be reassigned to a judge according to the local rule previously violated by the District Court), considering the appearance of impropriety resulting from a disproportionate : number of cases in which a particular party is involved being transferred to the same judge in violation of the Local Rules for assigning cases? Did the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit err in denying Petitioner's Motion for 7 Disqualification of the unethical counsel who are professed putative parties in this proceeding and who have failed to answer the question whether they or their predecessors were in the Ku Klux Klan? Did the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit err in reinstating, through its refusals torule __ on multiple Issues Presented and in its permitting an unreconstructed, discredited defense counsel’s Notice of Deposition to trump a pre-existing, supervening order of a federal administrative judge, the 1964overturned rule from the disgraceful Supreme Court decision in Dred Scott v. Sanford, 60 U.S. 393 (1856)?