(1) . Under this Courts Precedent in Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. v. Hartford Empire Co., 322 U.S. 238,244 (1944), dictating an Appellate Courts inherent duty to uphold the integrity of its Jurisdiction by Vacating Judgement (s) obtained by Fraud upon the Appellate Court (s), did Chief Judge Owen, Willett and Oldham as a three Panel of Judges of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, violated an inherent duty imposed upon them by a Motion for Vacatur filed by Ms. Davis on November 29th 2019, asking a remedy of the Frauds perpetuated upon the Court of Appeals by Ms. Mary Stewart, Connie Brown and an unknown female help desk representative of the Fifth Circuit on October 22nd 2019 to November 22nd 2019;

(2) . Whether Chief Judge Owen, Willett, and Oldham as Circuit Judges of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals willful failure to comply with their inherent duty (ies) to uphold the integrity of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals Appellate Jurisdiction, by Vacating the Orders entered on November 20th 2019 and tainted by Fraud (s) perpetuated upon the Court by Ms. Mary Stewart, Connie Brown and an unknown female help desk representative of the Fifth Circuit on October 22nd 2019 to November 22nd 2019, also amount (s) to an willful Usurpation of Judicial Power; and

(3) . Whether the aforementioned Deputy Clerks of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals engaged in a Fraud upon the Court, as to inflict irreparable harm or injury upon the Petitioner, the Public's Confidence in the integrity of the Court and a Manifest Injustice in this action, warranting Equitable Intervention by this Court under the All Writs Act, Section 28 U.S.C. § 1651 of the United States Constitution, the United States v. Munsingwear, Inc. 340 U.S. 36 (1950) Doctrine and/or Rule of Law and the Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. v. Hartford Empire Co., 322 U.S. 238, 244 (1944) Case Precedent, by which this Court stated that it had the duty to protect the integrity of its Appellate Jurisdiction against Fraud and that the duty was clearly imposed upon the United States Supreme Court by the Petitions at bar in which the Fraud was practiced.

Whether the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals violated its inherent duty to uphold the integrity of its jurisdiction by failing to vacate orders obtained through fraud