Whether the lower courts abused their discretion by failing to apply vicarious liability principles and by dismissing various civil rights claims under multiple statutes

Number One Whether the lower courts abused their discretion by failing to apply the vicarious liability principle enunciated in Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) and Ashcroft v. All-Kidd, 563 U.S. 731 (2011)? Question Number Two Whether the lower courts abused their discretion by dismissing petitioner's section 1981 and 2000e by conflating both statute since section 1981 requires not much exhaustion CBOSC West Inc. v. Humpries? Question Number Three Whether the lower courts abused their discretion by denying petitioner amended complaint under Fed R. Civ. P. 15(a) and 19(a) Foman v. Davis,? Question Number Four Whether the lower courts abused their discretion by conflating petitioner section Question Number Five Do "state actions" that occur directly or indirectly under color of state law and violate an individual's Fourteenth Amendment rights validate damages recovery suits filed under 42 USC Section 1983 under Lugar v. Edmonson Oil Co. Inc., precedent? Question Number Six Whether the lower courts abused their discretion by conflating and refusing to entertain petitioner 28 USC Section 1350 claims under Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co.? Question Number Seven Whether petitioner stated a cause of action on every claim and specifically her retaliation claims in vengeance for the free exercise of her statutoiy and constitutional rights under Gonzales v. Trevino? 0)