Whether the illegal denial of 'Due Process ' to Petitioner and the harm being persistently
inflicted upon him, violates the rights promised by the U.S. Constitution 's Amendment V and
Amendment XIV by his former government employers, by State and Federal organizations, or
even by the Courts, if not, does this not violate the 'Rule of Law? Pages 12 to 16 herein, ECF
63,Page 9,^136 (iv) ECF 63,Page 9, ^ 36 (iv).

Is the Fourth Circuit in conflict with the Supreme Court that has held that courts of appeal are
required to "consider any change, either in fact or in law, which has supervened " since the
disputed decision was issued, pursuant to Patterson v. Ala. and Watts, Watts & Co. v. Unione
Austriaca Di Navigazione, when Circuit Court denies new and decisive evidence?
Pages 28 to 29 herein, ECF63,Pagel6. USCA4 Appeal: 22-1772 Doc:33, Page 2. Pet. App. 3 and
Pet. App. 4.

Whether the highest Court finds it in the Public Interest to punish an innocent person?
Specifically, when Respondents ' documents prove that there was no 'Due Cause ' (no Complaint
against Petitioner, when UM 's Title IX Coordinator also records there was no Complaint, even
the so-called victim 's sworn EEOC Charge does not even mention Petitioner, and now when VA
BREF also asserts there was no Complaint), is it not proper for the Court to rule that there was
not even a Complaint and rectify this prolonged and grave injustice? Page 31 and Pet. App. 6,
Page 3 herein. ECF26,Page5,<fll3,ECF26.5, ECF5,Page37 J133,ECF16.7,Page2,ECF63-7

Whether the Supreme Court finds it in the- 'national interest ' to needlessly punish a vulnerable
foreigner from a friendly country and a time-tested ally of the United States when it is obvious
that it is because of Petitioner's nationality, that Respondents can continue to needlessly inflict
harm on him persistently that is ongoing and egregious, as stated by him from the onset of his
Complaint? It is a widely known fact that India treats American citizens in its country very well,
what about 'reciprocity '? Pages 32, 33, 34 and Pet. App. 6, Page 3 herein. ECF5-13,Page8, (H48.

Whether it is in the interest of U.S. 'national security ' when a person who submits evidence to
the "Office of Accountability & Whistleblower Protection (OAWP) of a Federal agency in
Washington D.C. " is retaliated against? Also, would this be in 'Public Interest ' when it becomes
widely known how a person who voluntarily submitted evidence is treated, then forget
foreigners, would even American citizens be hesitant to come forward to do so? Pages 32, 33,34
herein and Pet. App. 6, Page 3 attached herewith [USCA4 Appeal: 22-1772 Doc: 36], USCA4
Appeal: 22-

Whether the illegal denial of 'Due Process' to Petitioner and the harm being persistently inflicted upon him, violates the rights promised by the U.S. Constitution's Amendment V and Amendment XIV