Whether a state summary court has competent jurisdiction over an unlawful detainer action challenged by a bona fide property dispute arising from a non-judicial foreclosure auction of a privacy-label mortgage securitization.

Whether a non-assigned Article III judge's "independent duty" intervention with removal jurisdiction of a state unlawful detainer case to a related federal case is constitutional, absent emergency and absent any motion by a party.

Whether the remand by the non-assigned judge to the state court whose jurisdiction is challenged is constitutional amid the alleged fraud upon the court in the remand proceedings, and whether the remand for lack of subject matter jurisdiction over the state case that "forms part of the same case or controversy" is constitutional, notwithstanding the supplemental jurisdiction.

Whether non-borrowing co-occupants/family members of a homeowner have standing to FHA redress on grounds of an injury in fact as aggrieved persons.

Whether the holding by the trial court that Petitioners have no private party right of action under HAMP is valid, notwithstanding a landmark decision to the contrary.

Whether continuity plus relationship substantiated by a facially plausible factual content and extrinsic evidence is not cognizable enough to invoke the RICO pattern requirements as proximate cause.

Whether Local. R. 302(c)(21) limiting pro se litigants' due process rights to be heard before Article III judges is constitutional.

Whether a trustee of certificate holders of private-label MBS is eligible for postmortem credit bid on a non-judicial foreclosure auction, absent a competent cash bidder.

Whether a state summary court has competent jurisdiction over an unlawful detainer action challenged by a bona fide property dispute arising from a non-judicial foreclosure auction of a privacy-label mortgage securitization