Whether the California Supreme Court's failure to enforce a fully executed contract violates the Contract Clause and Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause

1. Whether the California Supreme Court ’s failure to enforce a fully executed contract —formed through mutual assent and valid consideration —violates the Contract Clause of the U.S. Constitution and the Fourteenth Amendment ’s Due Process Clause. 2. Whether a corporate defendant ’s breach of an agreed contractual waiver, combined with judicial refusal to enforce California ’s mandatory default judgment statute (CCP § 585(a)), constitutes an unconstitutional denial of due process. 3. Whether judicial officials' deliberate obstruction of ministerial duties — resulting in fraudulent denial of default judgment —constitutes fraud upon the court under Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. v. Hartford-Empire Co., 322 U.S. 238 (1944). 4. Whether the U.S. Supreme Court must resolve the circuit split on judicial fraud, where the Second Circuit mandates federal intervention in cases of fraud upon the court (Griffith v. Bank of New York , 147 F.2d 899 (2d Cir. 1945)), while the Ninth Circuit defers to state courts even in cases of judicial fraud (Toufighi v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 988, 510 F.3d 1059 (9th Cir. 2007)), allowing state courts to shield fraudulent rulings from federal oversight.