1. Whether subject matter jurisdiction matter was
properly invoked involving a continuing violation
of Title VII, 1983 etc. in the underlying claims of
retaliation that falsified documentation of 1099 forms
and W-2 from the year 2004 to 2021 involved the
concealment of monies illegally endorsed by Leonard
Sweeney Esq. Bank fraud

2. That conspiracy to conceal these funds for some
17 years from the IRS and the petitioner Michael F.
Kissell were to obstruct the Justice of a Jury award
issued in 2002 so future attachment of Petitioner
wages and pension would be diminished

3. Whether petitioner 's attorney Christopher-P.
Skatell hired in 2017 blatantly failed to continue the
appeal to SCOTUS in 2017 and filed a fictitious case
2-18-cv-1409 to conceal the Tax Fraud, involvement of
Patsy lezzi esq. tax attorney and Brian Zweicher.

4. Whether the actions and coercion of the
Respondents malpracticed the petitioner. Violating the
constitutional right of the petitioner and title VII to
be made whole

5. Whether the honorable Judge Cynthia Reed
Eddy should have been assigned to Case 2:22-cv-1715-
CRE knowing the prior fraudulent indiscretions and
failures of Petitioners attorney Christopher P. Skatell
in Case 2-18-cv-1409 that she presided over.

6. Whether the respondent 's deceptions led to a
limited investigation by the IRS and the IRS attorneys
up to and including the Tax Court in 2021. Causing a
unjustified decision.

7. Whether the scheme developed was in fact
developed to create further bias through the rein
statement process in violation of Title VIL Creation of
a hostile environment.

8. Whether inadequate and or blatant procedural
process has denied the rights of the petitioner by and
through misrepresentation, deception and lies that
inspired violations of the rules of professional conduct
rules of the Court by the attorneys hired by the peti
tioner, leading to tax fraud, further retaliation 14th
amendment article 1 section 2

9. That the petitioner has read the statement of
the per curiam CM/ECF document opinion document
46. The appellant is not an attorney but has read and
presented information from the Law library computer
that were presented in the appellants CM/ECF docu
ments 9 and 40 that counter the opinion involving
sovereign immunity presented to dismiss the appellants
complaint and was addressed on page 7 second para
graph CM/ECF document 40

10. The statute of limitations are timely with
information again copied from the law library and
computer on appellants page 6 document 40. Appel
lants documents 9 and 40 are established from the
information from the law library.

11. Petitioner has met the filing requirements in
the district court complaint and the respondents have
never answered the charges escaping and avoiding
the merits of the case. The statements of claims are
established from the rulings of the IRS the tax court and
actions

Whether subject matter jurisdiction was properly invoked for alleged Title VII and 1983 violations involving tax fraud, retaliation, and concealment of funds from 2004 to 2021