Whether a federal court has subject-matter jurisdiction to order a state court judge's jurisdiction and adjudge a patent application's procedural actions

I: Whether a federal court has the Subject-Matter Jurisdiction under any law of the United States to “Order ” and “Adjudge ” that a State Court Judge has the Jurisdiction to Decree Summary Judgment in an Action that was properly removed to a federal court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1454 in accordance with the procedures of 28 U.S.C. § 1446(d); and whether in so “Ordering ” and “Adjudging ” the inferior courts deprived Petitioner ’s fundamental constitutional rights. QUESTION II: Whether a federal court has the Subject-Matter Jurisdiction to “Order ” and “Adjudge ” that a “Form PTOL-1432 Notice Of A bandonment' issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO ”) pursuant to MPEP §711 (a) and 37CFR1.135in furtherance of its Final Office Action rej ecting a Patent Cooperation Treaty (“PCT” ) Patent Application on ground of the Applicants ’ failure to produce relevant scientific data does not support a lawsuit alleging that the purported “Confidential documents" which Applicants ’ attorneys swore under penalty of perjury, in Declarations and Certifications, to be “highly sensitive ... contributions to each of the claims... of the Patent application" and withheld from Petitioner during a prior misappropriation of trade secrets litigation were fraud. QUESTION III: Whether a State or Federal court in the United States has the jurisdiction to render nugatory the PCT Rule 43bis.l Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority issued on an International Patent Application. l LIST OF ALL