The U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) knowingly falsified its review of an offshore wind farm, concealing contamination harmful to human health, the project's cost ($2 billion), procurement manipulation, and other material facts. It approved the project based on its own deceit. BOEM has neither answered the complaint (7/20/2022) or the amended complaint (11/2/2022) nor responded to allegations of fraud. The court of appeals admitted the district court did not consider or allow argument on fraud claims (or parties named under those claims) before transferring the case. The transferee court did not recognize claims of fraud (or parties) before, without power, denying injunctive relief. Petitioner pro se first learned of that denial three weeks later.

1. Whether the Fifth Amendment requires that defendants answer allegations against them?

2. Whether fraud by a federal regulatory agency sends the wrong message to developers, regulators, and the public, and is the harm that flows from that message irreparable?

3. Whether construction, the plans for which the developer secured approval via fraudulent means, is a valid contributing economic injury when weighing the equities in contemplation of injunctive relief seeking to prevent that construction?

3. Whether 28 U.S.C. § 1404 requires consideration of the convenience of parties and witnesses before transferring a case three hundred miles from three federal agency defendants' offices, nine officials (defendants in fraud claims), potential witnesses, and seventeen causes of action to an inconvenient forum prejudicial to claims filed in a permissible venue?

Whether the Fifth Amendment requires that defendants answer allegations against them