Whether the First Circuit's refusal to undertake a de novo review with claims that pro se appellant did not develop his case for them to 'review' when appellant unequivocally stated the said bankruptcy judges refusal to Recuse

QUESTIONS PRESENTED I. Whether the First Circuit’s refusal to undertake a de novo review with claims that pro se appellant did not develop his cae for them to “review” when appellant unequivocally stated the said bankruptcy judges refusal to Recuse (even with a filed factual-legally supported motion for recvsal) from the title 11 protection I sought to protect a family home-wealth. And for NH bankruptcy judge Harwood to only recuse after as he said in open court that “he sees no reason why the defendants cannot now sell his house” that these words constituted a biased against petitioner at a time he failed to rule on filed motion for respondents wanton violations a statutory provision of “automatic stay”. Said bankruptcy judge also manipulated the court schedule. IL. Whether the single bankruptcy judge of 1st Cir Bankruptcy Appellate Panel, in spite of literally getting almost all the facts articulated in petitioner’s emergency appeal wrong as if she didn’t even care to read the motion and as she put “is another motion stay”(Dec 23, indicated her focus wasn’t to protect petitioner’s right rather legally unfounded comity with fellow bankr judge that said denial & deprivation rights to an Impartial Adjudication of facts in law, provided and protected “Appeal as a Right”. And her careless statement that “well they have already sold his house” constitutes “grave abuse of discretion” a violation of constitutional Rights; guarantees, protections. As evidenced when bankr judge(s) cannot function as BAP appellate jurist! Isn’t it also for 1st Circuit’s Nov 17, 2022 claim I did not address BAP raise issues when I did in “show cause” they called moot and in appeal brief it claimed it didn’t review? IIE. Whether the bankr judge from Maine brought im after the NH bankr recused finally recuse only “after getting his revenge” on petitioner as he put it and for said ME bankr judge also, said just as he dismissed my title 11 protection case, “that we here know you quite well” is knowing-willful violation of petitioner’s Constitutional Right to a free fair impartial adjudication in a U.S.Tribunal provided in the ist, 5th, 14th Amendment of the these U.S.Constitution, that this Substantive Right is afforded to ALL. That all the violations are inconsistent with this Court’s precedent? For the lead. 3j panelist of the 1st Circuit Appeal court who refused appellant, the statutory de novo 3 review in an appeal for wanton deprivation and denial of due process right, sanctioned the theft of property, proceeds from the fraudulent sale of his homestead that was ina Title 11 protection proceeding. Same Circuit court judge is the same that recruited. /sanctioned 3-4 lawyers as court appointed(non senate confirm) Bernstein Shur, as if there is agreement. The lawfirm has Ovide Lomantagne (recent ex chairman of St Mary’s Bank) as a major partner! The appearance of lack of fairness of process leaves a distinct sense that denial of de novo was wanton. Cases about St Mary’s and us has been to court thrice, via the 1st Cir and all of it Cir j Lynch & Howard control the case, each time it wasn’t granted Certiorari.