Whether a pro se litigant with disabilities can challenge federal court procedural rules and jurisdictional determinations based on constitutional due process claims

No question identified. File: Total Pages: 1 WA-@, Via U.S. Mail: Extremely Urgent to: Chief Justice Roberts, Jx., as Administrator, U.S. Supreme Court & also‘ to: Scott S. Harris, Clerk & for Roberts, Jr. as Administrator to forward a copy of this matter tol Associate Justices: From: R.JKulick in Pro Per, 38122 Village 38, Camarillo, CA 93012: Your most Honorable Roberts, Jr. as Administrator: 1) I, R.JKulick, declare under the penalty of perjury that everything in this matter below is true & correct to the best of my knowledge & belief & abilities (evidence in support given prior that suffering under ADA of 1990 & its side-effects from ttedications shich now more than ever doing anything or going anyshere for anything painful medical hardships-on a pain scale 1 to 10 a level 8 daily—unable to vaik ; let alone enough time & energy to avoid COVID-19 exposure aith veak immuntry system as elderly senior-taken three booster shots-confined a lot to. home bedrest & lifelong 4"¢ Dyslexia condition-obstacle & have no computer nor knosledge-how to use one, excuse any typo errors-Dyslexia): Signed: _ R.J. Kulick We Dated: -F-13: Subject: YZ ofTine correspondance EO: Ropers, Je. et CI eh 2. In RE: Mr. Scott, S. Harris letter dated‘ 10-2-23 in pe: Runt sruBahetels "et al, No.aa-4#H Request Extension of Time until USDC, Central District of CA, Case Kulick v. U.S. Supreme . Court, et al, has a definitive USDC ruling & USCA-9 definitive ruling & U.S. Supreme Court definitive ruling,This case matter ‘ denying forma pauperis has already been accepted prior & placed on docket 5-2-23. In RE: Rule 33.1, not applicable, since already docketed*too & its RE: has to do with "translation" was done in English. Please note: in RE: Ms. Lisa Nesbitt's letter dated 9-20-23 in RE: Articlé III of Constitution, about "jurisdiction" does not exist in the Constitution. See Proof Of Service dated. _.10-5-23 to US. Supreme Court, et al, vith Three Motions in RE: uspCc, Case #06474. "Rules" are not ratified in. State legislatures & are not in the Constitution,. rendering them not applicable! 3. Kulick like millions of others rec'd Honorable Discharge from the U.S. military. We put our lives on the line for our Constitution. We ‘were guaranteed as citizens the rights to equality & fairness & Due Process shich Kulick has been denied. We vere also promised life liberty & pursuit of happiness in the Declarationof Independaence . Here too, Kulick is being denied. a 4. Let us not forget that the "original intent"&"living intent" by our founders must not be ignored by any judiciary system under the U.S. Rule of Law. Which has been high-jacked & jack-booted by the two political partys in the Senate nominations for Justices of our’. federal courts. Adams & Jefferson & Chief Justice John Marshall, ‘all had a-hand in this. Which resuited in the idealogy(s) of these two political parties being imbedded in the opinions of sitting federal Justices. That's a violation of the Constitution & in part Kulick's litigation(s) to set right the violations he has cited. However, Kulick does not doubt the honorability of our federal Justices just their unfortunate hard-wired "“idealogy" az the corner-stone of their opinions. But, on its face, ve have a racketeering entity taking place here. When you boil everything done to.the reality. in the dire consequences of "opinions" based ‘on ."Idealogys". How.does this get reconciled when the fox ‘is ‘in charge of the chicken-coop? Which is the case that Kulick is up against in his "litigations" to set things right!!! R.d. Kulick yy _ Submission datea: W-7-74 a