The Ninth Circuit Court of Appealls (9th) did not follow rules being Federal Rules of Appeallete Procedure 'and precedent caselaw. By either ruling or not ruling on four arguments waived by the govenment. The unpublished Memorandum (memo) is not clear or consice. However, the (9th) does not have the authority to argue for the government. When the Court fails to rule accordingly this as well is the same as if the arguments were never raised. The question therefor, would be does the Appeallete Court need to follow rules? Or are they allowed to circumvent established procedure?

The other determination by both the District Court(DC)'and the (9th) is that a positive alert from a narcotics detection T(-9 provides Probable Cause (PC) for an arrest. This is contrary to prior ..Supreme.Court precedent establishing an alert from a dd(sniff . (P .td EARd kd-. This.igh COtt' hs :he.ld. di '. • . sticnt and seperate thresholds for (PC) to arrest and (PC) to Search. So then the question would be can a person be arrested when (PC) to search is established? Or does anactual physical search need to uncover evidence of illegal activity first then an arrest can occur?

The overall vagueness of the(9th) rulling does not answer arguments raised by my briefs. So then does the Appeallate Court need to address with more specificity to my arguments?

Does the Appellate Court need to follow rules? Or are they allowed to circumvent established procedure?