Whether the district court improperly denied Petitioner pro se due process and equal protection of law

QUESTIONS PRESENTED I. Whether the district court improperly denied . Petitioner pro se due process and equal protection of law, when it denied Petitioner the right to appearance, the right to be heard, to testify before a tribunal, the court. Throughout the entire case there was no hearing denying petitioner due process guaranteed by U.S. Const. Amend. I, IV, V, VI, and XIV. II. Whether the district court improperly dismissed Petitioner’s pro se FINRA arbitration appeal case to vacate award, pursuant to Fed. Arb. Rule 9, Stat. 10(a)? Whether their legal conclusions that Petitioner’s appeal to vacate award was time barred, and barred by res judicata? Were these pretexts erroneous? Ill. Whether the district court’s legal conclusion dismissing as moot Petitioner’s pro se African American minority's Motion for Summary Judgment, on grounds of Discrimination and Retaliation, was erroneous, wherein, the court entered judgment of “uncontested notion” for Summary Judgment when there was no genuine issue, and respondent had not filed an answer? IV. Whether the judges of the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals “committed errors of law and/or fact” and whether he abused his discretion or “acted in excess” of their jurisdiction? 1