1. Whether Justice Barrett, as the last standing
Justice with original jurisdiction, with the same
duty and oath as the lower courts to enforce the
Supreme Law of the Land — this Court 's own stare
decisis Mandated Prohibition from repudiating
Government-issued patent grant contracts,
declared in Trustees of Dartmouth College v.
Woodward (1819), Grant v. Raymond (1832),
Fletcher v. Peck (1810), must accept and grant this
petition for writ of mandamus, in the interest of
justice, whereas:
Chief Justice Roberts recused, seven Justices lost
subject matter jurisdiction, and failed in their
ministerial duty to enforce Dartmouth College and
Fletcher, whereby the courts and USPTO
adversely dominated the process to prevent
Dartmouth College and Fletcher from ever coming
before this Court, leaving the inventor with rights
and no remedy, in violation of the Separation of
Powers 1 and Contract Clauses of the Constitution.

2. Whether Justice Barrett has a duty to enforce this
Court 's own stare decisis Mandated Prohibition
from repudiating Government-issued patent grant
contracts, as declared in Trustees of Dartmouth
College v. Woodward (1819), Grant v. Raymond
(1832), Fletcher v. Peck (1810) as the Supreme Law
of the Land, fading which she must move against
the lower courts and USPTO for their breach of
their solemn oaths of office in failing to enforce the
Supreme Law of the Land.

3. Where the Federal Circuit disparately reversed
only in the inventor 's case its own Aqua Products '
reversal of Orders that failed to consider "the
entirety of the record " but gave defendant
Microsoft and the USPTO the benefit of its Aqua
Products ' ruling, whether such process disorder
constitutes denial of a fair hearing and equal
protection of the laws, entitling the inventor to
Constitutional redress.

4. Whether this Court 's Mandated Prohibition from
repudiating Government-issued patent grant
contracts may be reversed by mere mention of
Fletcher by the Federal Circuit in its Order; and if
not, whether the Federal Circuit is under
obligation to enforce it, even after dismissal of the
case in process disorder, particularly where Chief
Justice Marshall declared in Trustees of
Dartmouth College v. Woodward (1819) that there
is no controversy and nothing for the courts to
consider, save enforce the Constitution.

5. Whether the courts and USPTO have the authority
to reject and not enforce Dartmouth College, Grant
v. Raymond or Fletcher, wherein is declared the
Mandated Prohibition from repudiating
Government-issued patent grant contracts, by this
Court as the Supreme Law of the Land.

Whether Justice Barrett must enforce the Supreme Court's stare decisis precedents prohibiting repudiation of government-issued patent grants