Whether due process requires vacating a state bar license suspension based on a purported order lacking notice, hearing, and jurisdictional validity

1. Do Due Process and equity justify rehearing sua sponte based on undisputed evidence of judicial conspiracies and frauds on court in dismissing child custody appeals in Petition No.18-569 and Petition No.22-28 which caused Plaintiff permanent parental deprival, justify immediate release of Lydia Deborah Wang from 18 years’ lengthy confinement to unlawful and dangerous custody up to present to enable the child to be with Mother for Christmas, after she had been without Mother for 13 Christmas, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §2106 and common laws on the US Supreme Court’s granting rehearing sua sponte? Does Due Process justify immediate restatement of Plaintiffs California Bar License as the suspension was based on January 25, 2022 order of California Supreme Court’s prior Chief Justice, in conflicts of interest, without notice or hearing when the ground of the order is based on enforcement of a void child support order of May 3, 2013 and the May 19, 2028 order is fraudulent as the order is based on a purported Board of Trustee Resolution which does not exist, was without notice nor hearing? . Shall California Franchise Tax Board be required to provide accounting on total amount garnished and all communications, electronically or by mail, regarding Petitioner with State Bar of California, California Supreme Court and James McManis ? Shall Tsan-Kuen Wang be ordered to comply with a deposition with production of documents to account for all briberies and i ii money taken from Plaintiff in the past 13 years? . Shall Department of Child Support Services Disbursement Center or Department of Child Support Services at Santa Clara County be ordered to provide accounting on how it allocated the money collected from Plaintiff since May 3, 2013? . Shall subpoena be issued to allow investigation on the clear and convincing evidence of conspiracies involved in the dismissal of Shao v. Roberts, et al. with case number of 2:22-cv-00325? . Shall Rob Bonta be ordered to provide the complete emails with “California Department of Child Support Services” regarding Shao v. Roberts, et al., 2:22-cv-00325 at the District Court of Eastern California as shown in App.181 of the Petition? . Shall Appeal No.22-15857 pending at the Ninth Circuit be stayed pending decision of whether Judge John A. Mendez’s order and judgment shall be reversed for undisputedly lack of jurisdiction as Judge Mendez exceeds his jurisdiction in assigning Plaintiffs motions for injunctive relief to a Magistrate Judge and further did not obtain a consent from Plaintiff as a matter of law? iti PARTIES IN THIS PROCEEDING Petitioner, Yi Tai Shao aka Linda Shao, is representing herself, with contacting address at P.O. Box 300; Big Pool, MD 21711. Respondents: appellate panel at Appeal No.22-15857 at the Court of Appeal, Ninth Circuit, including Judge Barry G. Silverman Judge Ryan D. Nelson Judge Patrick J. Bumatay And Chief Judge Mary Murquia All appellees at the underlying appeal of Shao v. Roberts, et al. as shown in the docket of 22-15857 in App.7Rob Bonta, California Attorney General and Judge John A. Mendez, Magistrate Judge Allison Claire iii