Anthony T. Grose, Sr. v. Steven T. Mnuchin, Secretary of the Treasury

The question present to this Court in this Civil Action matter, [suit or proceeding in a court of the United States to which, against the United States], -fa federal department, office, agency, officer, or employee(s), whom is a party,} pursuant 28 U. S. C. ~2403 - “Intervention by United States; constitutional question” - wherein the constitutionality of an Act of Congress affecting the public interest is drawn into question, the court shall certify such fact to the Attorney General, and shall permit the United States to intervene for presentation of evidence. The question is - Were any such documentation entries in the court’s proceedings whether the U. S. District Court or the Appellant Sixth Circuit Court had jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ~2403(a) that certified to the Attorney General the fact that the constitutionality of an act of congress was drawn into question?

Does the doctrines of res-judicata and collateral estoppel fail when the Petitioner has repeatedly disputed, proven with sufficient evidence in the courts records of retaliations, that not any one of the necessary elements required for this type of lawsuit {summary judgment, - dismissal} had been established?

Does the doctrine of collateral estoppel [in a “employment law discrimination Claim Pursuant to Title VII and ADEA”] of “continuous retaliation” - hostile work environment, harassment, denials of Reasonable Accommodations], bar or limit a subsequent claim, that were pending, being held on appeal before the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission {which the petitioner had not exhausted “all” administrative remedies}, that “had not ripen.” for adjudication, stop a lawsuit [summary judgment and in the alternatively Dismissed the complaint], from being review by the courts “base on the merits” ?