Whether Petitioner's Constitutional right to procedural due-process was violated

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether Petitioner’s Constitutional right to procedural due process that he is guaranteed under the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and made applicable to all states by the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was violated such that an Idaho Default Judgment is void. 2. Whether service by publication in a local Idaho newspaper and mailed notice to Petitioner’s defunct real estate business’s Post Office Box was the method most likely to provide Petitioner, who had moved to Seattle, notice and a meaningful opportunity to be heard sufficient to satisfy due process. 3. Whether the Bank’s ex parte application for a default and Idaho Default Judgment without notice to Petitioner, who had emailed the Bank a month earlier, violated Petitioner’s due process rights. 4. Whether the Bank’s’ knowingly false misrepresentation to courts in Idaho and in Washington, where the Bank attempted to register the Idaho Default Judgment, deprived Petitioner of his due process rights because the Bank’s untruthful misrepresentations to these state courts assured the Bank that Petitioner would not become aware of the Idaho Default Judgment’s entry until more than one year had passed, and the passage of more than a year from the date a judgment is entered in Idaho was detrimental to Petitioner’s right to have the Idaho Default Judgment vacated.