QUESTION 1: Does this Court agree that Petitioner's case was wrongly dismissed as a sanction for her inability to attend a deposition without accommodations under rules of Title II of the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) and 29 U.S.C. § 794 — Nondiscrimination under federal grants and programs?

(a) Does the ADA apply to the Middle District? Judge Irick contends that ADA rules and HIPPA don't apply to federal proceedings.

(b) Did the IRS wrongly demand medical information be produced to the public or there would be no accommodation in depositions or hearings?

(c) Did Judge Irick wrongly disregard Petitioner's physician's letter opinion asking for accommodation (dismiss or quash information) in violation of 28 U.S.C. § 636?

(d) Did the IRS wrongly demand disabled Petitioner pay $140 for her own accommodations?

(e) Did the Court wrongly dismiss this case for lack of prosecution?

(f) Did the Court wrongly award costs of $4,900 for depositions which the IRS made sure Petitioner could not attend due to no accommodations?

QUESTION 2: Does this Court agree that Petitioner did exhaust what administrative remedies there were AND the exhaustion of administrative remedies cannot apply where the IRS has no jurisdiction?

QUESTION 3: Does this Court agree that one requested amended complaint is not a fair limit, considering Petitioner is a pro se first-time litigator?

QUESTION 4: Does this court agree that this suit was wrongly dismissed for alleged violations of Anti-injunction Act and the Declaratory Judgment Act?

QUESTION 5: Did Judges Irick and Mendoza wrongly dismiss this case by alleging the government had not waived sovereign immunity?

QUESTION 6: Does 28 U.S.C. § 636 apply to Judge Irick who considered this case claiming it asked for injunctive relief, issued a judgment on the pleadings, dismissed or quashed information, dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, and involuntarily dismissed this action?

QUESTION 7: Did Judge Irick's prejudice against pro se litigants, falsifying a hearing transcript and conferring alone with IRS attorney indicate mandatory recusal?

QUESTION 8: Does this court agree that this case has merit and should be remanded for trial with all these issues settled so the case can proceed?

Does the Supreme Court agree that the Petitioner's case was wrongly dismissed due to disability accommodation issues and procedural violations by the IRS and federal courts?