Whether the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit correctly applied the well-established exception to the law-of-the-case doctrine for appellate decisions that commit clear error and, if followed, would work a manifest injustice

QUESTIONS PRESENTED I. Whether the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit : correctly applied the well-established exception to the law-of-the-case doctrine for appellate decisions that commit clear error and, if followed, would : work a manifest injustice. : II. Whether the US District Court correctly con: cluded that the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuits’ decision in the prior appeal was clearly ; ; erroneous to the extent it upheld an assignment ; by an entity purporting to act solely as a “nomi_ nee” for a dissolved principal with unknown successors. . III. Whether admitted and obvious Lender Income : Fraud and Forgery on a Mortgage Application is exempt from the definition of ‘Predatory Lending’ as defined on the Department of Justice website : and in the Texas Penal Code § 32.21(a)(1)(A), can . be excluded from ‘de novo’ review by the Panel[s}. IV. Whether the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals is bias. See 28 U.S. Code § 453 & 455. In Marshall v. Jerrico, Inc., 100 8. Ct. 1610 (1980), the Supreme Court of the United States said, , “The Due Process Clause entitles a person to an impartial and disinterested tribunal in both civil : : and criminal cases . . . The neutrality requirement helps to guarantee that life, liberty, or property will not be taken on the basis of an erroneous or : oe ; distorted conception of the facts or the law. At the same time, it preserves both the appearance and reality of fairness...” (p. 1613) ) ii : QUESTIONS PRESENTED Continued : ; . V. Whether the decision to change the Opinion from : . Unpublished to Published is warranted based on the Fifth Circuits manifest departure from the Supreme Court of Texas precedent by relying on : an Erie Guess.