1. Whether the California Federal Courts ignored the federal laws concerning a public official forging her name on petitioners house contract involving a South Carolina judge intentionally embezzling petitioners awarded proceeds via opposing counsel's ecrow account involving multiple parties against irrevocable binding arbitration and formal agreements signed by all respective lawyers in 2011 and 2021 in finality.

2. Whether the California courts error in law on federal question and diversity jurisdiction involving a public official concerning federal crimes, nor understood that respondent Berkeley County was working under the color of law as petitoner, college age children or ex husband did not live in Berkeley County, nor attended school in Berkeley County during that time to date.

3. Whether the California courts and respondent intentionally violated petitioners Due Process, Proper Procedural Due Process, including violating First Amendment Rights to willfully obstruct justice and discriminate against petitioner.

4. Whether the California courts failed to acknowledge the fact that petitioner was illegally held against her will in Berkeley County South Carolina jail on a false bench warrant by Abuse of Process, along with abuse of power while intentionally and malicously slandering petitioner and petitioners business on social media with a false arrest and wrongful imprisonment, including a photo by Berkeley County Mugshots for years.

5. Whether the California courts and respondnet intentionally placed false and misleading statements in court documents stating that this case was frivolous while malicously retaliating against petitioner by retracting previously awarded fee waivers, including a separate order entered after petitioners case was already accepted in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

6. Whether the Calfornia courts and respondent were involved in ongoing Intrinsic and Extrinsic fraud in both states while intentionally ignoring two Bill of Rights, and all domestic assault laws with no respect shown to petitioner by law while refusing protection, resolve, remedy, or relief as previously requested by petitioner.

Whether the California Federal Courts ignored the federal laws concerning a public official forging her name on petitioners house contract involving a South Carolina judge intentionally embezzling petitioners awarded proceeds via opposing counsel's ecrow account involving multiple parties against irrevocable binding arbitration and formal agreements signed by all respective lawyers in 2011 and 2021 in finality