Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals judges violated judicial conduct rules by disobeying procedural rules in May Chen's multiple petitions

Pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 20, petitioner further appeals the U.S. Court of Appeals judgment due to unresolved appeals (U.S. Court of Appeals Case No. 25-7121). Previously filed petitions: Petition for a Writ of Certiorari: filed on June 27, 2023 No. 23-5501 “May Chen v. MPD ” Petition for a Writ of Certiorari: filed on August 6, 2024 May Chen v. EEOC et.al. Petition for a Writ of Certiorari: filed on March 18, 2025 May Chen v. District of Columbia et.al. Petition for a Writ of Certiorari: filed on Nov 3, 2025 May Chen v. M & T Bank et.al. Petition for a Writ of Certiorari: filed on Nov 13, 2025 May Chen v. District of Columbia et.al. Petition for a Writ of Certiorari: filed on Dec 3, 2025 May Chen v. District of Columbia et.al. Pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 13, Rule 33.2 etc, each petition was filed within 90 days after the issuance of judgment. Petitioner strictly followed all court rules and procedures in a timely manner. No cross complaint /cross appeal /cross petition filed by Respondents. No extension of the time. Amount in controversy is unlimited. One original plus two copies. 1. Supreme Court Rule 20 and Rules of Judicial Conduct Rule 1.1, “a judge(s) shall comply with the law, including the Code of Judicial Conduct ”. In regards to the subject case, judge Katsas; Walker; Childs and the U.S. Court of Appeal Clerk Clifton B. Cislak disobeyed the law F, R.C.P. Rule 55 (default I default judgment) due to F. R. C. P. Rule 12 (failure to answer Summons & Complaints), F. R. App. P. Rule 31 (failure to file Reply Brief), F. R. App. P. Rule 27 (Emergency Motions) as well as all other applicable law refenced under