1. Whether the Ninth Circuit of Appeals erred in affirming the Western U.S. District Court's ruling barring the Petitioner's 42 U.S.C. §1983 claims for Unlawful Arrest, Assault and Battery, Unlawful Imprisonment (and) Negligence, pursuant to the Heck Doctrine, in which, conflict with several other circuit court rulings, now warranting review by Certiorari to resolve the conflict on Constitutional grounds in the interest of justice before the ruling becomes clearly ambiguous? Yes, so Certiorari should be granted on Constitutional grounds in the interest of justice.

2. Whether the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals erred in affirming the Western U.S. Court of Appeals erred in affirming the Western ruling barring the Petitioner's 42 U.S.C. §1983 claims for Unlawfuil Arrest, Assault and Battery, Unlawful Imprisonment (and) Negligence pursuant to the Heck Doctrine, in which, conflict with (this) court's ruling on Valid Conviction, now warranting review by Certiorari to resolve the conflict on Constitutional grounds in the interest of justice, before the ruling becomes clearly ambiguous. Yes, so Certiorari should be granted on Constitutional grounds in the interest of justice.

3. Whether the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals erred in affirming the Western U.S. District Court's ruling barring the Petitioner's 42 U.S.C. §1983 claims for Unlawful Arrest, Assault and Battery, Unlawful Imprisonment. (and) Negligence pursuant to the Heck Doctrinee, in which, conflict with (this) Court's ruling on Rubber Stamp Warrants, now warranting review by Certiorari to resolve the. conflict on Constitutional grounds in the interest of justice before the ruling becomes clearly ambiguous. Yes, so Certiorari should be granted on Constitutional grounds in the interest of justice.

4. Whether the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals erred in affirming the Western U.S. District Courts ruling on barring the Petitioner's 42 U.S.C. §1983 claims for Unlawful Arrest, Assault and battery, Unlawful Imprisonment (and) Negligence pursuant to the Heck Doctrine? In which conflict with (this) Court's ruling under the Castro Notice Requirement, now warranting review by certiorari to resolve the conflict on Constitutional grounds in the interest of justice before the ruling becomes clearly ambiguous? Yes, so Certiorari should be granted on Constitutional grounds in the interest of justice.

5. Whether the Petitioner unsigned (limited) Felony of Transfer to the Department of Corrections pending his Direct Appeal, is Constitutionally valid under U.S. Amend. 4th and U.S. Constitutional Amend. 14, for the Respondents to have lawful jurisdiction over the Petitioner (and) his person? No, so Certiorari should be granted on Constitutional grounds in the interest of justice.

6. Whether the Respondents should be held liable to the Petitioner for unlawfully arresting him and his person, by taking him into their cus

Whether the Ninth Circuit of Appeals erred in affirming the Western U.S. District Court's ruling barring the Petitioner's 42 U.S.C. §1983 claims