Does the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals decision conflict with a decision of the Tenth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals?

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED Under Y.S.C.A.Coast, Amend.J4; D>. Does the “Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appea Ls decison oi Which Review Is Sought Conklict with a dee/sion of the Tenth Cireuit U.S, Court of Appeols “Pure suant to LOFT/SVe CHRISMAN, 812 F.3d 1268 Cloth Cir, aole)? DD. Is the Petrtioner entitled to Equitable Tolling where he “Actively Pursued His TSudicral Remedies toy Fag a [“delective Pleading | P 3. Was the Petitloner ‘AC Cirmatively Mis led by the State Courts? AN. Wos the Petitioner Induced and Treked Inte allowing the Filing deadline to Pass by his adversarys Misconduct ? . S). 10 Petitioner's “Fivs+ Federal Habeas Petition alleges Wessly Discover ed Evidence Is the Federal Filing Deadline I-Yyean Crom the Bate , on Which the [Factua | Predicate| of the Claim... Could have heen L discovered Thraugh--«Due Diligence. § aakt#CA) (NC; Pursuant te i MCAUIGGINY. PERKINS 64 Us, —Ca0l3)? b>. Deol the State Waive the PER Time Bar? And; . is ("Improper to Address the Timeliness of a Notice of PLR Petition Ror the First Time on Appeat Pursuant to this Court's Legaf Ress oning In A LLEWV, SIE BERT SS2.U.S. 3 Ca0o7) quoting PEO PLEV. ROCLAIR, 20a. ILL. ad 89,101,789 NE. ad 73% 2%a Ca06dds 8). Is “Adot Required to Keep and Provide State Prisoners With w Copy of 28 U.S.C.A.§ 224#CAEDPAD I-year Federal Statute of Limitations, the Very same Statute belng Used to render Petitvoner’s Federal Pedrtion Time. Barred, In thelr Prison Libraries Par Lewis, CASEY s1a.d.5, 3434990)? ; q. Did Petitioner Make. w Substartiot Showng of the Dental af ov Constitutional Rolk?