Patrick Comack v. Leland Dudek, Acting Commissioner of Social Security

I. Did the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit (“Appeals Court”) violate Supreme Court case precedent when it arbitrarily used a three-part test to decide whether the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida - Key West Division (“District Court”) could waive administrative exhaustion of remedies (“administrative exhaustion”) for jurisdiction in a 42 United States Code (“U.S.C.”) §405 (g) Social Security Administration (“SSA”) disability case when Mathews v. Eldridge 424 U.S. 319 (1976) established the two-part “Mathews v. Eldridge test” for the District Courts to use when deciding whether to waive administrative exhaustion for 42 U.S.C. §405 (g) jurisdiction? II. Was the Appeals Court correct when it ignored PlaintiffyPetitioner Patrick Comack’s (“Comack’s”) claim, which was collateral to Comack’s claim for disability benefits, that the Defendant/Respondent SSA Commissioner (“Commissioner”) violated Comack’s constitutional right to fair due process as dictated by the 5th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution when the Commissioner and her Miami SSA office forged and fabricated Comack’s wage evidence in the SSA disability administrative review process, and then used this false evidence in the Commissioner’s June 10, 2021 Second Remand Order in order to unlawfully remand Comack’s disability case back to the same Miami SSA office who manufactured the false evidence? i ■ft**: