1. Should the Court resolve the split of authority among the Circuits about whether and when the citizenship of constituent members of an unincorporated business trust determines federal diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1)?

2. Should the Court resolve the confusion among the federal district courts of Texas about how to determine whether a trustee, or the trust itself, is the real party in interest rather than a nominal or formal one for purposes of determining federal diversity jurisdiction?

3. Should the Court clarify further the meaning and intent of its decision in Americold Realty Trust v. Conagra Foods, Inc., 577 U.S. ___; 136 S. Ct. 1012 (2016)?

4. Texas law holds that a void special endorsement in a note's chain of endorsements deprives the eventual possessor of the note the status of a holder or even an owner who can enforce its obligations. Does the federal courts' refusal to give this Texas law the adjudicative force it deserves subvert the principles of comity and federalism for which Erie R. Co. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 65 (1938) stands?

Whether the citizenship of constituent members of an unincorporated business trust determines federal diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1)