1. The Record less Review: Whether a United States Court of Appeals violates the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause and acts in excess of its jurisdiction by issuing a summary affirmance while the official appellate docket confirms the court never received, docketed, or possessed the original record of proceedings required by Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 10(a).

2. The Phantom Record: Whether a structural error occurs, rendering an appellate judgment void, when a Chief Judge's order denying misconduct complaints asserts a "personal review" of the record (App. D-l, 24a), yet the official court record reflects a status of "Record Requested-No Receipt" (App. C-l, 19a; App. C-2, 21a), thereby creating a "phantom record" that precludes meaningful adversarial review.

3. The Lack of Magistrate Consent: Whether the Fourth Circuit sanctioned a grave departure from the accepted and usual course of judicial proceedings by affirming a dismissal "with prejudice" where the underlying judgment was facilitated and entered by a Magistrate Judge without the express written consent of the parties required by 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) and without the issuance of a Report and Recommendation under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b).

4. Subversion of Mandamus: Whether a District Court violates the divestiture rule and the Due Process Clause by rushing to enter a final judgment (March 12, 2025) specifically to moot a pending Petition for a Writ of Mandamus (denied March 14, 2025; App. B-l, Ila), and whether the Fourth Circuit's subsequent affirmance of that "race to judgment" constitutes a structural failure of appellate oversight.

Whether a United States Court of Appeals violates the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause by issuing a summary affirmance without receiving the original record of proceedings