Whether attorneys who filed and signed Proof of Claim on behalf of creditor violate automatic stay 11 U.S.C. § 362(a)(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6) by concealing mortgage payment before the commencement of the case?

Whether the acceleration clause of deed in trust, triggered the modification clause of section 1322(c)(2)?

III. Whether creditor violate the accelerated, clause by concealment of mortgage payment?

IV. Whether respondent violated (U.S.C.) 1701-3(d)(1), by creating a junior lien?

V. Whether judgment liens on a homestead are exempt from forced sale pursuant to Section 1 of Title 31 of the Oklahoma Statutes and Section 2 of Article XII of the Oklahoma Constitution?

VI Whether a secondary mortgage is a property interest sufficient to trigger the protection of the automatic stay?

VII Whether creditor accepting payments after default or offering debtor to bring loan current waived acceleration?

VIII. Whether attorneys who filed and signed Proof of Claim on behalf of creditor violated 11 U.S.C. § 524(i), 18 U.S.C. §§ 152, 157, by withholding and concealing mortgage payment before commencement of the case, caused material injury to petitioner, henceforth, waiving attorney-client privileges?

Whether attorneys who filed and signed Proof of Claim on behalf of creditor in contempt of court, for willfully and intentionally, withheld evidence by providing false information to federal court order regarding one monthly payment?

X. Whether attorneys who filed and signed Proof of Claim on behalf of creditor an accurate proof of claim for an unextinguished time-barred debt in a bankruptcy proceeding violates the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act?

XI. Whether attorney breached contract, for failure to notify clients of suspension, file motion on accounting records prior to summary judgment claim and after confirmation of bankruptcy case?

XII. Whether respondent's foreclosure filed in September 2010 and petitioner's confirmed chapter 13 bankruptcy in November 2010, paid arrears in full, cased was discharged and closed in January 2015 and district ordered case moot September 2015, failed to meet the requirements for the Oklahoma Dormancy statute, failure to file Statement of Judgment filed with Administrative Director of Courts, and failure to file an extension of lien judgment prior to November 2915 with district court?

XIII. Whether respondent accelerated due date in September 2010 meet the statute of limitation to foreclosure in Oklahoma?

XIV. Whether respondent failed to refile after the statute of limitation began to run under 12 O.S. §100, assuming any action was filed after November 9, 2016 in District Court under CJ 2010-281?

XV. Whether attorney-client and work product doctrine is waived, due to Attorney's History Bill implicated the images of November 2009 mortgage payment for accounting records?

XVI. Whether the District Court's violated Petitioner's Fifth or Fourteenth Amendments by extinguishing citizens' rights to due process when there is no other avenue for due process provided by the State to redress ongoing injury to Petitioner's by denying a hearing to expediate automatic stay?

XVII. Whether counsel for respondent violated Adversary Proceeding by failing to answer motion within required time?

Whether attorneys who filed and signed Proof of Claim on behalf of creditor violate automatic stay 11 U.S.C. §362(a)(D)(2)(82) (QO) by concealing mortgage payment before the commencement of the case?