Whether a 105-day delay by a judge in responding to a court letter constitutes a failure of due process

1. Whether a delay of 105 days by Judge Noel Eason Primos in responding to a court letter, which mandated a determination for oral argument within 5 days, constitutes a failure of due process. 2. Whether the imposition of cruel and unusual punishment constitutes an exceptional circumstance that deviates significantly from accepted standards of decency and fairness, thereby warranting deviation from standard legal procedures. 3. Whether fraud upon the court constitutes an exceptional circumstance. 4, Whether it is permissible under postal regulations to use a docket number in place of the addressee’s address on mail. 5. Whether the collection of +300% interest on a judgment under Delaware law, which disfavors compound interest, constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. 6. Whether a judgment should be validated in the absence of valid proof if the judgment numbers are inconsistent. ii 7. Whether it is permissible for a judge to attend a hearing without adequate preparation. 8. On what legal grounds does the Secretary of State serve as the registered agent for an unaccredited subprime lending company? 9. Whether the designation of a governmental entity as a registered agent confers governmental entity status upon the corporation. 10. Whether a governmental entity bears equivalent responsibility if the corporation it represents commits fraud. 11. Whether the deprivation of constitutional rights constitutes exceptional circumstances.