Whether a defendant can seek relief under the savings clause of 28 U.S.C. § 2255(e) when the court of appeals changes its binding precedent to what the defendant previously tried to persuade the court to change

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1, IF A DEFENDANT DID TRY TO PERSUADE THE COURT OF APPEALS TO CHANGE ITS BINDING PRECEDENT BUT WAS UNSUCCESSFUL, WOULD THE DEFENDANT BE ABLE TO SEEK RELIEF UNDER THE SAVINGS CLAUSE OF 28 U.S.C. § 2255(e) IF YEARS LATER THE COURT OF APPEALS CHANGED ITS PRECEDENT TO WHAT THE DEFENDANT TRIED TO PERSUADE THE COURT TO CHANGE ITS PRECEDENT TOO ? 2. IF THE DISTRICT COURT USED A TRAFFIC STOP AGAINST A DEFENDANT AS A INTERVENING ARREST AT SENTENCING, THAN YEARS LATER BINDING PRECEDENT IS ISSUED THAT SAYS A DISTRICT COURT IS NOT ALLOWED TO USE A TRAFFIC STOP AS A INTERVENING ARREST AGAINST A DEFENDANT AT SENTENCING, WOULD THE DEFENDANT BE ABLE TO SEEK RELIEF UNDER THE SAVINGS CLAUSE OF 28 U.S.C. § 2255(e) ? 3. IF A DEFENDANT IS DENIED A REDUCTION OF HIS SENTENCE UNDER AMENDMENT 782 BECAUSE THE DISTRICT COURT INCORRECTLY APPLIED A DEFUNCTED 10 YEAR MANDATORY MINIMUM STATUTE TO THE DEFENDANT'S SENTENCE AT THE DEFENDANT'S SENTENCING HEARING, CAN THE DEFENDANT SEEK RELIEF UNDER THE SAVINGS CLAUSE OF 28 U.S.C. § 2255(e) IN ORDER TO HAVE THE DEFUNCTED 10! YEAR MANDATORY MINIMUM STATUTE REMOVED FROM HIS SENTENCE SO THAT THE DOOR CAN BE OPEN FOR THE DEFENDANT TO SEEK A REDUCTION OF HIS SENTENCE UNDER AMENDMENT 782 ? 4, IS IT A MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE WHEN A DEFENDANT IS DENIED A REDUCTION OF HIS SENTENCE UNDER AMENDMENT 782 BECAUSE OF A DEFUNCTED 10 YEAR MANDATORY MINIMUM STATUTE THAT -LEGALLY DOES NOT APPLY TO HIM, AND IF SO, CAN THE DEFENDANT USE THE SAVINGS CLAUSE OF 28 U.S.C. § 2255(e) TO CURE THE INJUSTICE WHEN NO OTHER VEHICLE OF A PETITION IS AVAILABLE FOR HIM ? -i