Did the Ninth Circuit err in concluding that the lower US District Court of Montana proceedings could be equitably affirmed when the district court objections of record and a number of the noticed for appeal orders were inappropriately excluded and not reviewed on appeal?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Did the Ninth Circuit err in concluding that the lower US District Court of Montana proceedings ; could be equitably affirmed when the district court objections of record and a number of the noticed for appeal orders were inappropriately excluded and not reviewed on appeal? ‘Alternatively, does the combination of Ninth Circuit Rule 30-1.3. “No Excerpts Required for Pro Se Party” and the circuit’s prohibition of “citations directly to the underlying record” authorize opposing counsel to unconstitutionally withhold legally required documents that would otherwise be available for pro se filers under FRAP 30(b)(1)? 2. Did the Ninth Circuit err in affirming their clerk’s order denying this Petitioner’s right to cite documents of record from the district court proceeding (as argued in the appellant’s opening brief) in his reply brief while in the same order denying this : Petitioner the right to file a reply brief? 3. Did the Ninth Circuit err when it held the opening brief accountable to technical pleading requirements that circumvented adjudication on the merits after the circuit’s published for pro se use, informal forms counseled the pro se pleader that they did not have to do more than say in what part of the record the district court had made mistakes and affirm that the alleged mistakes had indeed been objected to in the district court proceedings? . 4. Did the Ninth Circuit err in not addressing the allegations that opposing counsel were obstructing ; the course of justice and collaboratively engaging in extrinsic fraud by breaching their procedural duties to | u | have included all of the pro se pleaders’ referenced objections of record and all of the objected to orders within the excerpts of record being reviewed on appeal? ; 5. Did the Ninth Circuit abuse its discretion by ignoring undisputed factual allegations that the nonprofit corporation, Cattail Creek Community Association (as CCCA Inc below) is founded on criminally forged articles of incorporation? ; 6. Did the Ninth Circuit abuse its discretion in determining could adjudicate allegations of bias without having knowledge of all the facts from the district court record, particularly the objections duly filed in the district court record? 7. Did the Ninth Circuit err by not finding in favor of this Petitioner when opposing counsel breached their duty to provide the portions of the district court record that were pinpointed and argued in the opening brief as having the controlling law and facts that supported adjudication in favor of this pro se pleader? | | { if iii |