Lorina G. Delfierro v. Pensco Trust Company, fbo Jeffrey D. Hermann

When the Internal Revenue Code 26 US 408 requires a Custodian for a Self-Directed IRA to Operate in Commerce and the Contractual Arrange - ment Between the Self-Directed IRA Custodian and the Self-Directed IRA Beneficiary Clearly Establishes a Custodial Arrangement Rather than a Trustee arrangement. Does the Formulated Plan/Account, Name as "Custodian For Benefit of the Beneficiary IRA Account Number" Have the Requisite Article III Standing to Invoke the Jurisdiction of the Court on Litigation Over a Plan/Account Asset Consisting of an Assignment of a Promissory Note Purchased by the Beneficiary of the Self-Directed IRA Without Joining the Beneficiary? Did the Ninth Circuit Violate Petitioner's Due Process Rights as Guaranteed by the 5th and 14th Amendment by Recognizing a Plan/Account in the Caption, Name as 'Custodian For Benefit of the Beneficiary IRA Account Number" as the Self Directed IRA Custodian Having the Requisite Standing to Invoke the Jurisdiction of the Court, Rather than the Account Beneficiary "For Benefit Of' the Account, When the Contractual Arrangement Between the Custodian and Beneficiary Clearly Establishes a Custodial Arrangement rather than a Trustee arrangement, and the Beneficiary Has Expressly Indemnified the Custodian?