Whether Apple has committed systematic fraud, racial targeting, and constitutional violations through defective product design and judicial misconduct

] |i)_jThe defendant has been, since September 2017, committing fraud and assault against jail its custom ers (billions of consumers) maliciously shipping products that are defective, do not perform as advertised, and MAIM consumers including by electric burns to the human body with any usage, and by permanently deafening with high frequency noises, and have been overheating, charging stopping due to excessive heat (did not happen with products produced earlier, including same model), shorter lifespan (earlier failure) of battery, HALF THE BATTERY LIFE AS ADVERTISED, puncturing parts where devices simply won ’t turn on or won ’t do proper outputs and become actually unusable as it outputs incorrect results including devices within weeks, speakers producing popping sounds (explosive noises) on top of the high frequency noises, melting charging cables, burning with thermals burns rarely on top the always persistent electric burns, device slowdowns due to excessive heat (not able to play games smoothly or otherwise sustain performance), WHICH got to the point that the iPhone 15 Pro Max is slower than the iPhone 14 PM and 13PM which is explicit fraud, and so on; most prominently, there has been on average at least one iPhone explosion per year since 2018 when no explosions of iPhones in the 10 years prior. irr—i,b)jThe defendant has committed racial targeting against the Chinese, deliberately giving the Chinese more serious physical injuries than other races (by shipping more hazardous devices to China including HK excluding Taiwan). C) The DC subverting its local rules . The CA sanctioning (app roving ) this . d) MULTIPLE circuits conspicuously subvertin g governin g SCQTU S case law Coppedge v. United States. 369 U.S. 438 (1962), SUBVERTING RIGHT TO iAPP EAL, calling appeal (appellate review) “ciaim of appeal ”, CLAIMI NG RIGHT"! ■ SNOT TO REVIEW THE DOCKET AND RIGHT TO KNOWINGLY SUBVER T THE I LAW, which subverts the 5th, 8th, and 14th amendment s, Art I, and Acts of Congress) ,6) CA-9 subvertin g jLiteky v. United States, 510 U.S. 540 with pure malice, if) CA-9 denied motion to expedite with no reasons stated, and against fact, j g) CA-9 violating due process and not rulin g on motion for rehearing fa) Other unlisted serious misconduct. Si) Of course , any aidin g of Apple’s conduc t const itutes an eighth amendment violation . 1 Si CA-9 subverting due process and 8th amendment and EPC with manufacturodl 'difficulties) k) Properly construing section 3 of Amendment XIV Petition -2!