Whether the Rooker-Feldman Doctrine bars a collateral attack on a void ab initio state court judgment rendered without subject matter jurisdiction

QUESTIONS PRESENTED . Rooker-Feldman (1) Whether the :Rooker-Feldman Doctrine barres a collateral attack on void ab:initio state court judgment rendered without subject matter jurisdiction? Specifically, can a federal court review a state court record to determine whether the state court had jurisdiciton to render its judgment? (2) After determining that the state court lacked jurisdiction to render its judgment; Whether a federal court can declare the state court judgment void ab initio and refuse to give it credit and validity? (3) Whether the Rooker-Feldman Doctrine barres a collateral attack on a void ab initio state court judgment that was rendered before the commencement of the federal action? Specifically, can a “state court loser" bring a collateral attack on a void ab initio state court judgment in the federal court? (4) Whether the Rooker-Feldman Doctrine is a Supreme Court created doctrine that prohibits the lower courts from "carving out" exceptions? (5) Whether there are "exceptions" to Rooker-Feldman? And, if so, whether there is an "exception" when the state court judgment was rendered without subject matter jurisdiction? (6) Whether there is a difference between an “Appellate Review" vs and a "Collateral Attack Review"? Specifically, whether ; (6) 28 USC 1257 barres a federal court from inquiring whether a state court had jurisdiction to render its judgment? (7) Whether a collateral attack on a void ab initio state court judgment satisfies jurisdiction under 28 USC 1343? Specifically, whether a void ab initio state court judgment, rendered without subject matter jurisdiction, violates the Due Process clause of the 14th Amendment? : (8) When a federal court dismisses a collateral attack ona state court judgment under Rooker-Feldman, without any determination on whether the state court had jurisdiction to render its judgment; Does Rooker-Feldman effectually give the state court judgment more effect than state law allows? Heck v Humphrey, 512 US 477 (1994) (9) Whether a federal declaration that a state court judgment is void ab initio is a "Favorable Termination" under Heck? Aud, if so, whether that "Favorable Termination" may be granted in a federal action for damages, or, must the "Favorable Termination" be granted before the federal action for damages commences? (10) When the success of a state law claim wholly relies on the success of a 1983 claim; Whether the state law claim accrues with the 1983 claim when "Favorable Termination" is granted? Wrongful Incarceration, 1983 Claim '(41) Whether Wrongful Incarceration is a species of substantive due process that does not require an allegation that some specific guarantee of the Constitution was violated?