In judicial proceedings in United States District Courts, what Due Process mandates under United States Constitution Article III and Amendment V, Rules Enabling Act, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Inherent Judicial Power protect an attorney's reputation, honor, integrity and property? In this case, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed monetary and non-monetary sanctions imposed by the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut under inherent powers.

The first question presented: Are sanctions imposed upon Petitioner under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure derived from inherent judicial power as discussed in Willy v. Coastal Corp., 503 U.S. 131, 139 (1992)?

The second question presented: Are federal courts required to follow the Fifth Amendment due process mandates of Chambers v. Nasco, Inc., 501 U.S. 32 (1991) and Roadway Express, Inc. v. Piper, 447 U.S. 752 (1980) in ascertaining whether Petitioner lacked good faith to award attorneys' fees under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure?

The third question presented: Did Congress by the Rules Enabling Act, confer upon this Court the authority to adopt the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and expand inherent power sanctions beyond Chambers and Roadway to deprive Petitioner of liberty and property?

What Due Process mandates under US Constitution Article III and Amendment V, Rules Enabling Act, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Inherent Judicial Power protect an attorney's reputation, honor, integrity and property?