Jehan Semper v. Scott Bessent, Secretary of the Treasury, et al.

Constitutional and Civil Rights District Court

1. District Court FAILS to Consider Indigent Pro Se Plaintiffs Filings and Motions Whatsoever. Is it a violation of rights protected by the constitution, civil rights, right of equitable access to justice and/or error, abuse of discretion, arbitrary act, capricious act or otherwise improper act or decision when the district court refused to consider indigent pro se Plaintiffs filings and motions by way of Romero's (116) [Appendix B.2.3] which instructed the clerks to: (a) cease filing indigent pro se Plaintiffs filings and documents as active filings to be considered by the court; and (b) to instead lodge the filings as inactive, not to be considered whatsoever. See Context of Questions for detail.

2. Delay and Thus Denial of Justice. Is it a violation of rights protected by the constitution, civil rights, right of equitable access to justice and/or error, abuse of discretion, arbitrary act, capricious act or otherwise improper act or decision when the district court inexplicably delayed for nearly 3 years in the (a) termination of Ogden and Weber defendant(s); and (b) the dismissal of Plaintiffs IFP granted complaint for lack of jurisdiction? See Context of Questions for detail.

3. Did the district court otherwise err, abuse its discretion, act arbitrarily and/or capriciously or otherwise act improperly in this case? Appeals Court

4. Appeals Courts FAILS to Consider PlaintiftfAppellant's Motion for Reconsideration/Rehearing. Is it a violation of rights protected by the constitution, civil rights, right of equitable access to justice and/or error, abuse of discretion, arbitrary act, capricious act or otherwise improper act or decision when the appeals court FAILED to Semper v Yellen/Bessent, et al Petition for Writ of Certiorari