1.) (?)- The Ninith Circuit Court of Appeals "lost" the Subject Matter Jurisdiction "Authority" and "resulting in" the Court "lacking of Subject Matter Jurisdiction""of the Cause/claim filed, "for" "Failure to COmply with" Federal law "Stautory" "Mandate" , in/of 28USC§2244(3)(d)" for "Time Requirement for the Court" requiered to make any "Lawful" &/or "Timely" deter mination on the filing (Rule 9 Motion) filed by the Petition . ner Harmon on the Date of Oct. 29,2021 (Appendix Letter "B" with (3)three ORDERS[#l/#2/#3])was appealing in/on Motion and the Ninith Circuit Court issued their Unalwful ORDER denying the Rule 9 Motion on Date of March 22,2022 (Appe ndix Letter "A"). The Ninith Circuit "continued showing of" the "lost and Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction" "by/of" the 9th.cir. by "Not complying with" this Court's(U.S.Supreme) determination that a court..."A court must adhere to stat u tory TEXT..." (Nasarallah v Barr 140 S.Ct. 1683) & the 9th. Cir.Court had not and has not; and this Court determination also "shows" "Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction" and "abuse of discretion", by trying to issue an 0RDER(APPENDIX Letter "A") this Court determined (U.S.Supreme) ..."No U.S. Judge's has the Powee to rewrite Rules by Judicial Interpretation ..." (Harris v Nelson 394 U.S.S.Ct. 1082 22 L...ED 2d 281 LEXIS 2161) ???

2.) (?) The Ninith Circuit "denied" the Petitioner Harmon's Const itutional right to/of Due-Process (14th.Amend .) and to lawful -i and timely Proceeding(s ). "of" there "is not" "any" "Statutory" "Authority" for the Court "Appeals" "to go beyond" the Federal "Statutory Authority Mandated TEXT" resulting in the Denial of 14th.amend .Constitutional Right to & of DueBreprocess_?_? (Statutory Mandated TEXT of 28USC§ 2244(3) (dj)| reads : ..."(d) The Court of Appeals SHALL grant or deny the author- zation to file a second or sucessive application not later than 30 days after the filing of the Motion ..."

3.) (?) The Ninith Circuit Court denial of 14th.Amend, to the Const. right to Due process is not a.) Harmless Error, and is a violation of Substantive Rights and b.) is "shown to be" (Intentional & Knowingly~"constitutional Plain Error "by" the Court/Judges ) for the Record shows (Appendix Letter "C") the Dockett page "showing" Harmon for over (5)five Months[once a month] Wrote to each of the Chief Judges (Thomas &Murguia) asking them & shareing that the Court "was not" in compliance with the Federal Mandate Requirements for 30 day time limit to determine an

Whether the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals erred in denying the petitioner's right to due process under the Fourteenth Amendment, which is not a harmless error and is a violation of substantive rights that was intentional and a known constitutional plain error by the court/judges