1) Whether the California Court of Appeal erred by affirming judgment based on the federal district court's inquiry notice in favor of the defendants without addressing, hearing or ruling on plaintiffs equitable estoppel defense and disregarded it?

2) Did the district judge's bias toward and/or collusion with defense counsel and its client in federal court unfairly impact petitioner's rights in state court under 28 U.S.C. § 455(a) when it ruled on inquiry notice to plaintiffs claim?

3) Whether based on question one and two (1) and (2) plaintiffs due process clause was prejudiced thereby?

Whether the California Court of Appeal erred by affirming judgment based on the federal district court's inquiry notice in favor of the defendants without addressing, hearing or ruling on plaintiffs equitable estoppel defense and disregarded it?