DO INKNATES HAVE 5 AND I4TL AMAEND MENT PRE-DEPRIVATION ROYALTIES?

D, SHOULD THE EASTERN DISTRICT U.S. DISTRIOT COURT OF NC ORDER THE DEFENDANTS TO PAY WIITNESS FEES TO PLADUTIFFS RES GESTAE WIDNESS?

3. SHOULD PLAIANTIFF BE ALLOWED COUNSEL IN THE ALTERNATE OF QUESEIOM TWO, TO ENALE HIU TO CONFIRN DELIVERY DATES, 3IGNATURES, VAUE OF THE TWO ROYALY CHECKS?

H, IS MALICTOUS INTENT SHOWNI BY THERE BETNG TUO CHECKS, SENT ON TNO DAYS, BOTH AAVING TO BE STGNED FOR DISSA PPEAIUG IMITH ALL STAFE DENXING THEIR EXISTENCE?

S, WOUD IT BE CONSTETUTIDNALCY CORRECT TO AUOW JUDGE JAMES C, DEVER II DISNISS THI3 CLATN FROM A RETAGAAON LAWSU?

WHAT DEFENIDANTS HAVE DONE WITH THE CHECKS SINCE THE WIERE SENP?

OVER STATE OFFICIAL ACTIONS?

THE POSSIBLE IUEGAL DEPOSIT OF CHECKS?

. THE LAWBSUDT HAS BEEN INEFFECT OVER ONE YEAR, IS PUINTIFF Exhle TO LOCATED AT PO BOX S39 SUGAR GROLE PAHUFENNANS SERKAICES TELEPHONE N6: (814)350-(6898.

Do the plaintiffs have a due process right to funds from existing or future employment royalties?