Is federal bank robbery a crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)

Questions Presented For Review Lloyd pleaded guilty to carjacking, armed bank robbery and unlawfully brandishing a firearm during a bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). He filed a motion to correct the sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 in which he argued that after United States v. Johnson, 135 S.Ct. 2551 (2015), his § 924(c) conviction for brandishing a firearm during a crime of violence is longer enforceable. The district court denied his motion and the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed that decision. Lloyd presents the following issues to this Court: I. Is federal bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113, which can be accomplished by “intimidation” or “extortion” a crime of violence as defined in the force clause of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3)(A), if federal appellate courts have specifically held that intimidation can be implied and extortion can be carried out without the threat of violence? II. What amount of force satisfies this Court’s definition of “physical force”, that is, force capable of causing physical pain or injury to another person as described in Johnson y. United States, 559 U.S. 133, 140 (2010)? Ill. Did the Tenth Circuit incorrectly conclude that the element ‘use of a dangerous weapon’ in federal bank robbery always involves the threatened use of violent force when other circuits have found displaying, much less brandishing, a weapon is not necessary to commit the offense? i