1. Are the Appellees ['] -Defendants [']
inverse condemnation actions without eminent
domain proceedings but for "private benefit "
consistent with any proper United States
property acquisition procedure?

2. Does local government noncompliant
public administration under O.C.G.A. § 36-66-2
supersede the United States Constitution to take
property interest for "private benefit! "

3. Should the trial court decide on
Constitutionally protected property interests and
due process?

4. Does the trial court order properly
overlook the United States Supreme Court
jurisdiction?

5. Is it proper to consider the Appellees-
Defs., Geosam et al., and the United States or it's
Departments or Agencies as the same entity?

6. Is Fed. R. Civ. P 71.1 for condemning real
or personal (Indigenous) property appropriate for
private benefit matters?

7. Should the PETRS f]-APPELLANTS [']-
PLS.[ '] Complaint for property deprivation
conversion without due process be overlooked?

Are the Appellees' inverse condemnation actions without eminent domain proceedings but for 'private benefit' consistent with United States property acquisition procedures?