1. Are the 120 paragraphs of detailed factual statements in the Complaint
and Appendix, together with numerous public record exhibits of
defendant perjuries and abuses of office, sufficiently detailed to rise above
mere "speculation, " the perjury of the lower court?
The questions of fact are readily decided:
a. Did defendants Buckley and Panos commit perjury in the original case?
b. Did magistrate Bowler commit perjury and abuse of public office in the
original case?
c. Did these perjuries and abuses of office have the effect of violation of
plaintiff rights under Amendments V and XIV to Due Process of Law, to
Equal Protection of Law, and against the taking of property without
compensation?
The Plaintiff demands full compensation and removal of the corrupt lower
court judges.

2. Are matters of perjury at trial and abuse of trial process res judicata,
when no such claims were even possible in the prior case, and only one of
four defendants is common to the cases?

3. Will this Court grant absolute immunity to a magistrate proven on
public record to have committed extreme perjury and abuse of judicial
office? Shall the US accept its constitutional responsibility for her actions?
Will this Court order the Court of Federal Claims to accept tort claim
jurisdiction as provided by the Tucker Act?

Whether the district court erred in dismissing the complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted