Whether the Court of Appeals properly affirmed the District Court's December 18, 2017 decisions

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether the Court of Appeals properly affirmed the District Court's December 18, 2017 decisions by which Petitioner’s complaint was dismissed 2. Whether the Petitioner’s complaint in the District Court had merit. 3. Whether Petitioner was entitled to proceed in forma pauperis in the District Court. 4. Whether Petitioner was entitled to proceed in forma pauperis in the Court of Appeals. 5. Whether the District Court correctly certified that the appeal was not taken in good faith. 6. Whether the District Court’s incorrect certification that the appeal was not taken in good faith is justified by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). 7. Whether 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) only applies to appeals by prisoners 8. Whether Rule 24 of the Court of Appeals permits appeals in forma pauperis 9. Whether good faith is lacking in the appeal. 10 Whether appellant has identified any non-frivolous argument on appeal. 11. Whether Coppedge v. United States,_369 U.S. 438,445 (1962), which permitted an appeal by a prisoner, is authority for denying an appeal by a non-prisoner 12. Whether Petitioner’s request to proceed IFP on appeal should nave been denied. 13. Whether the district court’s December 18, 2017 memorandum and order,of dismissal of the complaint was proper. 14. Whether a substantial question is presented on appeal, and the judgment of the district court should be summarily reversed. See_1st Cir. R. 27.0(c). 15. Whether The district court was not required to issue summonses until after it screened the complaint and amended complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) which provides: Notwithstanding any filing fee, or any portion thereof, that may have been paid, the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that(A) the allegation of poverty is untrue; or (B) the action or appeal (1) is frivolous or malicious; (ID) fails to slate a claim on which relief may be granted, or (iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief. 16. Whether even though no summonses ever issued, the clerk was required to issue the summons under the Rules. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(a) 17. Whether the Court properly failed to grant sanctions to Plaintiff 1