A. Whether the clandestine replacement of Jewish
Michael Levinson 's initial Administrative Law Judge
("ALJ ") Hearing Officer with a Muslim ALF was
prejudicial, violating his constitutional right to a fair
and impartial hearing and his right to Due Process of
Law?

B. Whether the initial ALJ hearing decision ordering
Michael Levinson 's two-year suspension and
reduction in status lacks substantial evidence to
support its decision and is therefore null and void?

C. Whether the delay of the Merit Systems Protection
Board ("MSPB ") in rendering Petitioner 's
termination decision until the Republican Member
left office, resulting in only the two MSPB Democrat
Members to render Petitioner 's Decision of
Termination violated Petitioner 's right to Due
Process of Law?

D. Whether the MSPB 's decision removing Petitioner,
Michael Levinson, from office lacks substantial
evidence to validate or support his removal and is
therefore null and void?

E . Whether the decision of the United States Court of
Appeals for the Federal Circuit ("USCAFC ")
affirming the MSPB 's decision of removal lacks
substantial evidence and is therefore null and void?

F. Whether Social Security Administration 's use of the
vague, all encompassing "Comply with Office Policy "
attempting to legitimize its illegal conduct and
decisions violates Michael Levinson 's right to Due
Process of Law?

G. Whether Social Security Administration 's series of
baseless, punitive never-ending measures against
Michael Levinson violated his constitutional Due
Process rights and Eighth Amendment protections?

Whether the clandestine replacement of a Jewish Administrative Law Judge with a Muslim ALJ was prejudicial and violated due process rights, and whether the Merit Systems Protection Board's decision lacked substantial evidence