◆ SpookStack

QUESTIONS PRESENTED (1) Appellant Challenges the Constitutionality of Act of Congre- ss,under Article III of the Constitution(28 USC § 1654 and WHETHER, the Federal Court(s), conspired and agreed,against Appellant,members of his race and Class to bypass Federal Rules, Civil and Appellate Procedurals,deliberate failure to follow the same Rules of law in Pro Se P-A-I-D case(S),in the same manner it does pleadings filed by attorneys,White, Rich, Famous and Powerful litigants, and WHETHER such abuses of power,deprived Appellant of Due Process and Equal Protec- tion under the law pursuant to Haines vs.Kerner, 404 US 519, | at 520521(1972), Reaffirmed in Estelle vs.Gamble, 429 US 97 at 106(1976); Conley vs.Gabson,* 355 US 41 at 45,46(1957);Jones vs.Alfred H.Mayer Co, 392 US 409(1968);United States vs.Will, 449 US 200(1980) ? (2) Appellant Challenges the Constitutionality under Article III of the Constitution,and 28 USC § 453 as Constitutional Error for federal judges, justices, attorneys,clerks,deputies,assis- tants,and law clerks,to follow the federal Rules of Civil and Appellate Procedurals in [ Pro Se P-A-I-D Pleadings ] as herein,the willful,callous and wanton failure of district, ju- dge,William S.Stiehl to Make Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law as required under Rule 52 Federal Rule Civil Procedu- ral,and WHETHER,district judge,Stiehl would have acted in the same manner,if these Four(4) P-A-I-D Civil Rights Complain- ~i-