Jane Doe v. Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Secretary of Health and Human Services

I. Can a ruling/judgment in a case that was illegally hijacked & then commandeered to give a specific outcome, and is rife with: Res, genetics/health fraud, atty malpractice, atty/judge collusion (captured on court records), targeted evidence suppression/deletion/exclusion, breach of multiple federal laws, and legal gamesmanship---stand, despite the judicial collusion within/between the lower Federal Courts, malpractice, all the lawbreaking, collusion, etc., that had previously occurred, but they want to draw the line at an alleged missed deadline due to circumstances they created?? II. Can a judgment/ruling that was intentionally not in accordance with the established laws/rules, violated multiple federal laws to illegally obtain law-protected, restricted files/info that was not even needed (because “subject matter expert” level filings had been provided that were in line with the rules of the program), & birthed from malice, ignorance, and the clear intent to financially defraud, stand*"despite info having been provided from someone with “lived” knowledge? PARTIES TO THE PROCEEDING Petitioner (appellant) is Jane Doe (who does not want to see, hear nor read about her case in the media or otherwise; all of my privacy rights have been violated). Respondent (appellee) is Robert F. Kennedy Jr, in his official capacity as Secretary of Health and Human Services. RELATED PROCEEDINGS United States Court of Federal Claims: Jane Doe v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, No. 13471 United States Court of Appeals (CAFC): Jane Doe v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, No. 251769