Can the identified 'Holder' of the Securitized mortgage debt avoid discharge of said debt when bonds are issued in accord with Title 48 C.F.R. Ch. 1, Part 53.228?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW The UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA errored in dismissing Petitioner’s discharge tender to settle and close the mortgage liability at issue in cause no: 3:22-cv-07715-JSC for the reasons below: 1. Can the identified “Holder” of the Securitized mortgage debt avoid discharge of said debt when bonds are issued in accord with Title 48 C.F.R. Ch. 1, Part 53.228? 2. Can the court dishonor discharge when bonds are issued in accordance with Title 48 C.F.R. Ch. 1, Part 53.228 by Petitioner (Jose-Franklin: family [Arau]) to discharge the alleged mortgage debt? 3. Can the court ignore the nature of the Bills of Exchange Act as it applies to discharging securitized mortgage debt in accord with Title 48 C.F.R. Ch.1, §53.228? 4. Is it possible to accomplish a quiet title action without court due process? 5. Can Respondent, who sold the mortgage debt to third parties, maintain standing to foreclose when the mortgage debt was discharged in accord with Title 48 C.F.R. Ch. 1, §53.228? 6. Can a party who is not the securitized mortgage debt “Holder” perform a ‘foreclosure action, i.e. “Rocket Mortgage, LLC et. al., Respondent? 7. There exists a question as to whether the conduct of respondent and the lower court have violated the U.S. Constitution, Art 1, S8, Cl. 17, Commerce Clause when blocking the ability to tender bonds (U.C.C. §2-511) to discharge commercial paper liabilities in addition to the U.S. Constitution, Art 3, $2, Cl. 1, Judicial Clause by and through Title 28 U.S.C. §3002 (4) and U.C.C. §1-201(2). Page 2 8. Can a “fiscal agent of the United States [Treasury],” pursuant to Title 12 USC. §266, evade fiduciary banking duty to discharge and block petitioner’s access to banking in addition to violating the commerce clause? 9. There exists a question for the court to determine whether the use of bonds in accord with Title 48 CFR Ch. 1 §53.228 being dishonored in accord with U.C.C. §3503(1)(c) by both respondent and the lower courts is a proper activity in light of the ' fact that said parties operate within and use bonds in their everyday business relations through the United States Treasury, Tax and Loan (TT&L) banking computer portal system. 10. Can the UNITED STATES and its “fiscal agents of the United States [Treasury],” (12 USC §266) violate International Treaty agreement provisions for The United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG)? Page 3