Whether the Fourteenth Amendment's due process and equal protection clauses require judicial review when state administrative proceedings involve alleged fraudulent misrepresentations that result in adverse judgments

No question identified. : which judgments were wrongfully issued against me, thereby depriving me of justice. 4. Infringements on Fourteenth Amendment Rights: My rights guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment have been violated through denial of equal protection under law and interference with due process particularly because judgments were delivered based on fraudulent representation executed by opposing party where: a) Both parties had agreed through a letter dated March 11, 2022, toa hearing at the Texas Workforce Solution, Round Rock, Texas (Refer to Exhibit CR26 &27). b) Front Desk Staff member Ms. Yadira Gonzales verified my presence for the intended hearing on March 18, 2022 (Refer to Exhibit CR37). c) J. Tucker, the presiding Hearing Officer, controversially reported that I failed to appear to provide evidence without justification (See Exhibit CR39). d) In reality, it was the defendant’s party the Texas Workforce Commission, who was absent, thereby leading to the rescheduling of the proceeding for . January 18, 2023, (Refer Exhibit CR5). e) The following court judgments were fundamentally premised on the misrepresentation that I failed to present myself at the hearing (Supported by corroborating legal documentation from the record, See Exhibit CR12). Given these mitigating circumstances and in order to comply with procedural requirements laid out under Supreme Court Rule 30, an extension for filing the petition for a writ of certiorari is essential. This additional period would enable me to thoroughly compile and submit my petition for your Honorable Justices’ consideration. Furthermore, I request a retrial, as previous rulings were predicated on erroneous information constituting fraud on the part of the defendants. Even the Supreme Court of Texas violated its own rule that states: “It is a CRIME to intentionally or knowingly file a fraudulent court record or a fraudulent instrument with the clerk. Please see Tx. Govt. Code #51901)”. The Supreme Court of Texas ruled: “Today the Supreme Court of Texas denied the motion for rehearing of the abovereferenced petition for review.” (Please see judgments of the Courts based on perjury as substantiated by CR26; 27; CR39; CR5; and CRi2 in which Mr. Bryan Daniel based his judgment; however, all these documents came from the court record.) Your keen understanding and willingness to grant this requested extension are earnestly sought. This formal request will help us uphold fairness and rigor within our judicial process. lam grateful for your time and understanding regarding this matter. Yours respectfully, PI | ae Ben Ogbodi gwu 1906 Matagorda Drive Round Rock, Texas, 78664