1. Whether the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Ruling on petitioner's claim to his Rights under the Speedy Trial Act is IN CONFLICT WITH OTHER CIRCUITS, when charges contained in the Criminal Complaint NOT brought in the Timely Original Indictment (August 20, 2008) but included in the UNTIMELY materially broadened and substantially amended Superseding Indictment (November 24, 2009) (that does NOT relate back to the Original Indictment) arising from the same conduct that increased petitioner's sentence THREE-FOLD (more than fifteen months passed instead of 30 days) violates 18 U.S.C. § 3161(b)? United States V. Uri Ammar, 842 F.3d 1203 (11th Cir. 2011); United States V. Palomba, 31, F.3d 1203 (9th Cir.1994); United States V. Timothy Alphonso Jones, 23.F.3d 1307 (8th Cir. 1994); United States V. Montoya, 827 F.2d 143 (7th Cir. 1987); United States V. Crane, 776 F.2d 600 (6th Cir. 1985); United States V. Dignam, 716 F.3d 915 (5th Cir. 2013); United States V Leftenant, 314 F.3d 338 (4th Cir. 2003); United States V. Cox, 553 F. App'x 123 (3rd Cir. 2014); United States V. Lucky, 569 F.3d 101 (2nd Cir. 2009); United States V. Bryant, 523 F.3d 349 (D.C. Cir. 2008). (See EXHIBIT A).

Whether the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Ruling on petitioner's claim to his Rights under the Speedy Trial Act is IN CONFLICT WITH OTHER CIRCUITS