Whether the pro se litigant's due process rights were violated by the state court's procedural irregularities and ex parte orders that prevented meaningful judicial review

No question identified. : APPLICATION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE A PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI To the Honorable Elena Kagan, Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States and Circuit Justice for the Ninth Circuit: Pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 13.5, Petitioner John De Light respectfully applies for an extension of time of 60 days to file a petition for a writ of certiorari, 1. Jurisdictional Basis. Applicant intends to seek review under 28 U.S.C. § 1257(a) of the California Court of Appeal’s order/decision in Case No. £086627. Discretionary review (and related stay relief) was denied by the California Supreme Court in Case No. 8292479 on October 1, 2025. 2. Judgment Sought to Be Reviewed; Current Due Date: Because the Court of Appeal’s judgment is subject to discretionary review by the California Supreme Court, the petition is due 90 days after the October 1, 2025 order denying discretionary review, i.e., December 30, 2025. 3. Extension Requested; New Due Date. Petitioner requests a 60-day extension. If granted, the petition would be due on February 28, 2026. 4, Extraordinary Circumstances Explaining Why This Application Is Filed Less Than 10 Days Before the Due Date. Applicant files this application on the due date because, after completing a final full read-through of the petition, he identified a material defect in the petition’s federal framing and deficiencies in the