Jonathan Valentin v. Pennsylvania Department of Labor and Industries

Should the First Amendment provisions to the U.S. Constitution addressing the making of any law abridging the freedom of speech; and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances continue being denied? Should the Fourth Amendment provision to the U.S. Constitutior addressing the making or enforcing of any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; binding all States from depriving any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law, or denying to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws continue being denied Petitioner filed for review of the U.S. Eastern District Third Circuit Court for the State of Pennsylvania's final dismissal and memorandum; wherein service of complaint was denied as having failed to state a claim upon which relieve could be granted; inter alia, Title 28 U.S.C. §1915 Proceeding in forma pauperis: (e)(2) Notwithstanding any filing fee, or any portion thereof, that may have been paid, the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that-(B) the action or appeal (i) is frivolous or malicious or (ii) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted. Should petitioner continue being denied service of complaint? If federal rule of civil procedure 15; amended and supplemental pleadings does not limit the number of times a complaint may be amended before service, why would the U.S. Eastern District Third Circuit Court? If all provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. §1915 and local rule of appellate procedure 24.1 address prisoner, should any portion thereof be used to deny petitioner service of complaint?