Whether or not this Court should call for an exercise of this Court's supervisory power by rejecting the Seventh Circuit's reasoning

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Whether or not this Court should call for an exercise of this Court’s supervisory power by rejecting the Seventh Circuit’s reasoning which affirmed the district court’s decision to dismiss petitioner’s complaint with prejudice rendered by the Magistrate Judge Paul R. Cherry who, at the same time, was under a 28 U.S.C. §455 filed by the same petitioners? Whether or not this Court should call for an exercise of this Court’s supervisory power by rejecting the Seventh Circuit’s reasoning where the Seventh Circuit ignored the pleadings by petitioners which set forth that a declaration served upon the district court by respondent, Schneider Electric, presented facts which were plausibly false under Rule 60(d) of the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure? Whether or not this Court should call for an exercise of this Court’s supervisory power by rejecting the Seventh Circuit’s reasoning which holds that the district court ‘s ruling which granted a summary judgment in favor of respondent, Schneider Electric — is presumptively reasonable — even when the district court ignored petitioner’s pleading which set forth that respondent provided information that did not support respondent’s position for a summary judgment and, in fact, respondent provided information which reflected that the facts submitted by petitioner actually supported a denial of a summary judgment? ii QUESTIONS PRESENTED Continued Whether or not this Court should call for an exercise of this Court’s supervisory power by rejecting the Seventh Circuit’s reasoning which holds that confirming the district court’s ruling — is presumptively reasonable — even when the case involving respondent, Schneider Electric, was not merged with another case (Kennedy v. Prairie State College) as requested by petitioner where this other case is substantially pertinent to the resolution of the issues in both cases?