Whether the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois improperly suspended a medical license without notice or hearing in violation of due process and a settlement agreement

a. Why did the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, twice unilaterally impose the punishments of "Suspension" upon the medical license of Arnold G. Phillips, M.D. without Notice or a Hearing thereby breaching the "Settlement Agreement"? b. Are pills for the performance a Nuclear Medicine Bone Scan available or not available in the United States? c. Are pills for the performance of a Nuclear Medicine Bone Scan available or not available anywhere on this planet? d. Is it in the national interest of the United States for any jurisdiction of the United States to prosecute anyone for not using pills for the performance of a Nuclear Medicine Bone Scan? e. Are provision of pills for performance of a Nuclear Medicine Bone Scan consistent with the United States Atomic Energy Act of 1954 as Amended? f. Have the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, or the United States Food and Drug Administration, or the United States Code of Federal Regulations, or the United States Atomic Energy Act of 1954 or any of its Amendments, the most recent Amendment being May 7, 2025, approved, at any time whatsoever, pills for the performance of Nuclear Medicine Bone Scans? i g. Is prosecution of Arnold G. Phillips, M.D. for not using pills for the performance of a Nuclear Medicine Bone Scan rational or irrational? h. Why did Illinois Prosecutor David Igasaki or Illinois Administrative Law Judge Bill G. Laskaris or an Illinois Chancery Court or an Illinois Appellate Court or the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, or the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit ignore Illinois Second Appellate District Case No. 2-98 ’0109? Case No. 2’98’0109 is a published, precedential Opinion written by Justice S. Louis Rathje, Justice because he subsequently served on the Illinois Supreme Court. My Nuclear Medicine Bone Scan work had thus, in Illinois Appellate Case No. 298’0109, already been judicially seen, considered, and judged by an Illinois Appellate Court and found to be in compliance with the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 et Seq. by correctly providing patient Doris Temesvary with an intravenous injection, not a pill or pills, for performance of a Nuclear Medicine Bone Scan. Many State of Illinois circuit court judges have relied on Illinois Appellate Court Case No. 2’98’0109 for many years, e.g., in Physician Lien adjudications. I ask how can the Illinois court system prosecute Arnold G. Phillips, M.D. for not using radioactive pills which do not and can not exist except by having in place Illinois Appellate Case No. 1’15’1284? i. Can the Illinois court system have it both ways for Nuclear Medicine Bone Scans: (a) by incorrectly approving the use of imaginary Nuclear Medicine Bone Scan pills by giving credence to the underlying ii administrative hearing through Illinois Appellate Case No. 1-15-1284 then denial of my Writ of Certiorari by the Illinois Supreme Court in Case No. 120705?; but, by (b) having in place the correct use of an intravenously injected radioactive pharmaceutical as in Illinois Appellate Temesvary Case No. 2-98 ’0109 which shows compliance with the Atomic Energy Act of 1954? Where is the truth? j. Is it in the national interest to allow the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. Eastern Division, as in Case No. 23’Cw00490 to take property by means of license suspension without notice or hearing? iii