Michael Ramon Ochoa v. Arthur Levine

The questions posed in the preceding course of appellate actions should be regarded as if entered here in their entirety.1

Does Judge Colville’s elevation to the federal bench or any other events during the pendency of this case lend urgency to the problem of Thrasymachus?2

Does Judge Colville’s own account of the different standards he used in applying Pa.R.C.P. 233.1 in this case and that of Ms. Jacquelyn B. N’Jai reflect systemic bias?

Do this Court’s 03-19-20 and 04-15-20 Orders in response to the global pandemic demonstrate that its onerous paper filing, formatting and fees serve no necessary purpose, other than to limit pro se access to justice?

Does this, too, reflect systemic bias?

Whose version of the facts is more “reflective of reality” de jure? de facto?

Does U.S. Constitution Amendment XI prevent this Court from learning anything from the recent collapse of the Pa. Supreme Court?

Are rigid versions of Originalism susceptible to reductio ad absurduml

Does this Court have any role in recognizing existential threats to the Republic?

Have we reached the “...burn the records and bill the victims” stage of our beloved United States of America?

Could all of this damage be mitigated simply by granting review? 1 See attached Exhibit H. Questions or Aporia or https://www.academia.edu/44185393/ Exhibit_J_Questions_or_%CE%91%CF%80%CE%BF%CF%81%CE%B9%CE%Bl%CF%83? source=swp_share 2 See Ronna Burger: https://www.academia.edu/ 44234603/%CE%91%CF%80%CE%BF%CF%81%CE%AF%CE%Bls_or_Perplexities? source=swp_share