1. May courts substantially disregard a party's briefs resulting in failure to hear the party and due process violations per Snyder v. Com. Of Mass., 291 U.S, 97, 116, 187 (1934), and Newell Co, v. Kinney Mfg. Co., 864 F.2d 757, 765 (Fed.Cir.1988)?

2. May Federal Circuit violate Fitzpatrick v. Bitzer, 427 U.S. 445 449-50, 456 (1976) failing to decide without deference the lower courts establishing a new legal principle, violating Fed. R. of Civ. Proc. (FRCP) 6(b)(1)(A) and 16(b)(4) and Lujan v. National Wildlife Federation, 497 U.S. 871 n.5 (1990), which provide for requesting extension of time at district court without a formal motion?

3. May courts violate Federal Rule of Evidence 702, Advisory Committee Notes on Rules—2011 Amendment, expressly admonishing "many courts have held that the critical questions of the sufficiency of an expert's basis, and the application of the expert's methodology, are questions of weight and not admissibility. These rulings are an incorrect application of Rules 702 and 104(a)," and Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharm., Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 592 (1993) and Gen. Elec. Co. v. Joiner, 522 U.S. 136, 146 (1997) mandate to make explicit relevancy and reliability determinations when a party challenges an expert testimony as irrelevant and unreliable?

4. May district courts enter summary judgement while entry of amended complaint conforming to new issues raised in the motion for summary judgment filed six weeks before is pending, in violation of mandates from FRCP 15(a) and Foman v. Davis, 871 U.S. 178, 182 (1962)?

5. May district courts disregard:

a. 28 USC §1331 express conference, "The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of all civil actions arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States," where Editorial Notes to §1331 specify the statute is legislated to include "actions brought against the United States, any agency thereof, or any officer or employee thereof in an official capacity" without limitation on the amount in controversy, violating Bowen v. Massachusetts, 487 U.S. 879 n.48 (1988)?

b. Self-executing waiver of sovereign immunity provided by the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution for damages from violations of due process of law and taking of property without just compensation, which waiver is ratified by United States v. Testan, 424 U.S. 392, 401 (1976); Jacobs v. United States, 290 U.S. 13, 16 (1933); First English Evangelical Lutheran Church v. Cnty. of Los Angeles, 482 U.S. 304, 314-316 (1987); and San Diego Gas & Elec. Co. v. City of San Diego, 450 U.S. 621, 654 (1981)?

6. May courts disregard Seventh Amendment right to jury trial in suits against the United States, ratified by Law v. Unite

Whether the Federal Circuit improperly disregarded constitutional due process protections and procedural rules in reviewing a patent-related dispute involving a pro se inventor's claims against the USPTO