In denying Petitioner's claims, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has divorced itself, jurisprudentially speaking, from the American court system by issuing orders which are in direct conflict with the Constitution, the Bankruptcy Code, the U.S. Supreme Court and the other federal Circuits. The most conflicted decision is manifested by the Court's failure to recognize that a judgment must be noticed to all parties, under the Due Process Clause of the 5th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Such failure voids the decision a6 initio.

Avoid order may be vacated at any time. While the Imputation Rule excuses failure to notice all interested parties, it does not apply if the interests of the partner with knowledge are adverse to the partnership's interests.

The Ninth Circuit also ignored Respondents' violation of 11 U.S.C. § 521(a), which requires debtors to schedule all their assets in their bankruptcy Petition. Such unscheduled assets remain property of the estate forever, until they are administered by the Bankruptcy Court. 11 U.S.C. § 554(d).

The Ninth Circuit has so far departed from accepted judicial proceedings and is in such conflict with precedent that its rulings trigger the Supreme Court Rule 10(a), which provides that a petition for writ of certiorari will be granted when a U.S. court of appeals enters a decision in conflict with the Supreme Court or courts of appeals on the same important matter. Shouldn't such deviation from accepted judicial proceedings require the Supreme Court to exercise its supervisory power?

Whether the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals erred in issuing orders that conflict with the Constitution, Bankruptcy Code, Supreme Court precedent, and other federal circuits