1. Whether pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1981, failure to
provide Appellants ' contractual dues is
discriminatory?

2. Whether Appellant 's exercise of
§925B to compel Utah to use California law
retroactive to July 23, 2019 when the parties
modified the employment to revert to California
law means that Cal. Civ. Proc. Code §904.1
applies making the Orders final and appealable?

3. Whether Appellant 's inability to counter the
Costs motion at trial Court prejudicial in light of
the fact that she won the costs motion at
the Court of Appeals on January 19, 2023 and
URAP Rule 34 (D) allows a party to file a
response?

4. Whether §925C allows Appellant
to get attorney 's fees and injunctive relief for
defending California employment in an out
of state forum.

5. Whether under URAP 5, the November 1, 2022
items mentioned at paragraph 5 b in the June
9th, 2023 Order arose from the interlocutory
appeal means that the Court of Appeals still has
jurisdiction under URAP Rule 5 and as the June
9th, 2023 Order was used to restrict Petitioner
from filing the costs on appeal win from the
interlocutory appeal, does that mean that the
Court of Appeals still has jurisdiction?

Whether pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1981, failure to provide Appellants' contractual dues is discriminatory?