Whether the Supreme Court order that Federal Courts of Appeals are obligated to sua sponte review subject-matter jurisdiction issues regardless of the circumstances. Gonzalez v. Thaler, 565 U.S. 134 (2012).

"When a party against whom a judgment for affirmative relief is sought has failed to plead or otherwise defend, and that failure is shown by affidavit or otherwise, the clerk must enter the party's default." Fed. R. Civ. R 55(a). "The rules at issue here are the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which have the same force of law that any statute does." In re Nat'l Prescription Opiate Litig., No. 20-3075 (6th Cir. 2020). Plaintiff filed a Motion (TWO times) per Rule 55(a) for Dorwin (the Clerk of the District Court) to enter a default against Defendant Brundage in an Unauthorized Practice of Law lawsuit. (Jaiyeola v. Brundage, No. l:21-cv-01053 (W.D. Mich. 2021)). Dorwin did not consider the two Motions and Dorwin did not respond to the two Motions. A Clerk is required to respond to Motions directed to the Clerk. Dorwin violated Plaintiff's "constitutional right to due process and equal protection," violated Plaintiff's "first amendment" rights, and denied Plaintiff due process. "All government officials must respect all constitutional rights." Ermold et al. v. Davis et al., Nos. 17-6119/6120/6233/6226 (6th Cir. 2019). "A fundamental requirement of due process is "the opportunity to be heard." Grannis v. Ordean, 234 U.S. 385, 234 U.S. 394. It is an opportunity which must be granted at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner." Armstrong v. Manzo, 380 U.S. 545 (1965). The denial of due process implied that the District Court "was without jurisdiction to render a final and binding decree." See Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co., 339 U.S. 306(1950).

Whether a District Court Clerk's repeated violations of Plaintiff's constitutional rights, first amendment rights, and denial of due process required the District Court's decision to be reversed by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Whether the Supreme Court order that Federal Courts of Appeals are obligated to sua sponte review subject-matter jurisdiction issues regardless of the circumstances