Whether the district court abused its discretion and made a clear error of law in dismissing petitioner's complaint for failure state a claim under the Fair Housing Act of 1988 (FHA)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED — 1. Whether the district court abused its discretion and made a clear error of law in dismissing petitioner’s complaint for failure state a claim under the Fair Housing Act of 1988 (FHA)(42 USC Section 3601 et seq.) for New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) failure to make repairs and remove mold/fungus from petitioner’s apartment. 2. Whether district court trial judge and the Second Circuit Court in . ignoring petitioner's private laboratory test results establishing mold . and fungus in apartment violates the Federal Rules of Evidence that contradicts NYCHA false allegation that no mold was present in petitioner’s apartment establishes prima facie evidence creates a ; showing of a clear error of law. NYCHA that no mold was found discovered created blatant bias. 3. Whether district court Judge Vyskocil, erroneous dismissal of this action usurp Congress legislative purpose for enactment of the Fair Housing Act surrounding petitioner claims of lack of repairs and mold that endangers the health and safety of petitioner and occupants of his apartment. 4. Whether the Second Circuit has a pattern of depriving petitioner due of process of law in Sykes v. N.Y.S. Office of Children & Family Servs. et al., and Sykes v. James, et. al., before the court below that resulted in an : fundamental unfairness, bias, and bad adjudicating that deprived petitioner of his basic civil rights protection as is present here 1 ;