Was the Ninth Circuit in conflict with now, the Second, Third, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, and Tenth Circuits, and the California Court of Appeal, First and Sixth Appellate Districts when the Ninth Circuit affirmed the Dismissal based on issue preclusion in violation of Manuel v. City of Joliet, 137 S. Ct. 911, 919-920, and fn. 8 (2017), when Petitioner was deprived of his evidence that was truthful, and under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 3 S. Ct. 1194; 10 L. Ed. 2d 215 (1963)?

Was the Ninth Circuit in conflict with this Court's Decisions in Leatherman v. Tarrant County Narcotics Intelligence and Coordination Unit, 507 U. S. 163, 113 S.Ct. 1160, 122 L.Ed.2d 517 (1993), and Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 78 S.Ct. 99, 2 L.Ed.2d 80 (1957), when Petitioner properly pleaded his Second Amended Complaint?

Was the Ninth Circuit in conflict with this Court's Decision in Buckley v. Fitzsimmons, 509 U.S. 259, 275-76 (1993), when the Respondents withheld evidence under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 3 S. Ct. 1194; 10 L. Ed. 2d 215 (1963), which is a law enforcement function?

Was the Ninth Circuit in conflict with this Court's Decision in Tower v. Glover, 467 U.S. 914, 922-923 (1984), where Petitioner's Public Defenders acted in conspiracy with the District Attorney to plead Petitioner as "guilty" when he protested his innocence during the 11-month period of his criminal case?

Did the District Court misstated facts in Petitioner's criminal case when Petitioner used self-defense after he was bitten by his estranged wife?

Was Petitioner's Second Amended Complaint still should be subjected to another amendment when amending the Complaint would not be futile?

Should the Hon. Virginia A. Phillips, the Chief District Judge in the case below, be disqualified from hearing this case after remand?

Was the Ninth Circuit's affirmance of the dismissal based on issue preclusion in violation of Manuel v. City of Joliet?