Whether the Fourteenth Amendment's due process protections are violated when a federal appellate court improperly denies a litigant's appeal of right and prevents de novo review

No question identified. : STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION In accordance with Supreme Court Rule 13(5), this Court follows these wellaccepted principles underlying 28 U.S.C. § 2101(f), which is the statutory authority for a judge of this Court or the Supreme Court to grant a stay/extension pending certiorari. Because staying the briefing is a form of temporary injunction that stops the normal litigation process, the court’s inquiry centers on whether the losing party can show both a likelihood of success on the merits and that it will suffer irreparable harm without a stay. Also, see 28 U.S.C.A. § 42 and Marshall v. Marshall (May 1, 2006) 547 U.S, 293, 298-299. JUDGEMENT: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, Judgements filed September 27, 2023; attached as Exhibit 1. Letter authorizing correction(s), attached as Exhibit 2. Considering the Orders submitted with this request, one must pay attention to the obvious complicity acted by the United States Court of Appeals. Here, you have an eight (8) year saga of racketeering, and a debacle of hatred spued by the Department of Veterans Affairs assigned to the same Unconstitutional two (2) judge panel. The 9» Circuit gives a horrible appearance to the otherwise honorable position of Circuit Court Justice. See 28 U.S.C. § 46(b). This is a direct violation of the United States Constitution, Amendment 14(1)(2), acted by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. ORIGINAL TIME TO FILE: The original time to file the subject Certiorari is December 27, 2023, for case # 21-56157, and December 26, 2023, for case # 22-55768. The Petitioners a requesting a sixty (60) day extension, which would be February 24'> and 25th, 2023 respectively, computed from September 27'» and 28', 2023. JUSTIFICATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME: Presently, the United States Court of Appeals for the 9' Circuit is acting to deny the Petitioners’ “appeal of right.” This act destroys and illuminates the Petitioners’ protection of the law, taking away our right to de novo review at the appellate level. See FRAP § 4. Jurisdiction Question: Must litigants wait for the Circuit Court’s response to the impending en banc request, before certiorari may be filed? As the Petitioners filed for en banc hearing, upon issuance of the attached Orders; the Orders that are the basis for this Request for Extension of Time and Additional Pagination. The Petitioners want to know if they are premature in their efforts to file certiorari currently. In other words, should the 9th Circuit be allowed to answer the en banc before a writ of certiorari comes within the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of the United States? is requested of this Honorable Court. Considering the fact that certiorari for case # 21-56030 was deemed unacceptable because the final Order, issued prior to the En Banc request, was not included in the