Roger Swartz v. Board of Trustees of University of Pennsylvania, et al.

i Appeal from the December 15, 2022, Per Curiam Opinion of Circuit Judges Greenaway, Jr., Porter and Nygaard of The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit entirely affirming the District Court’s Opinion from the Memorandum-Decision and Order and Judgment of The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania to Dismiss this suit with prejudice by Judge Edwardo Rubreno entered on March 23, 2022, and Action No. 22-1568. QUESTIONS PRESENTED

1. When effectively unrestricted research funding—requiring nothing more than a yearly progress update—by the state enables a party such as a University Professor to enjoy openended activities and privileged freedom to determine how to spend the vast majority of their time during working hours on what premise could that make them, or their acts to undermine the constitution rights of another treated as one carried out by a state actor?

2. Would demonstrating that unrestricted state funding led to significant increases in power— as defined by their ability to influence others to act—enabling one or more university professors to damage another by violating their constitutional rights who then filed a complaint against the Professor [s] “contain[ing] sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face”—demonstrate that