Does a corroborated claim of actual-innocence constitute an extraordinary-circumstance that justifies reopening the habeas-proceedings to adjudicate the unresolved-claims?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED ; QUESTION 1 ; This Court holds that factual innocence equates to an extraordinary circumstance that overrides a statute of limitation. McQuiggin v. Perkins, 133 S.Ct. 1924 (2013). Nonetheless, the Eleventh Circuit found Mr. Middlebrook's habeas: related Rule 60(b) motion untimely despite his underlying claim sounding in actual innocence. When a Rule 60(b) motion seeks adjudication of an unanswered claim, can the motion be untimely? . QUESTION 2 . Federal bank robbery requires the institutional victim to be insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. After more than a decade, the government released evidence established that the corporate victim was not insured. If the government had timely released this evidence, then tne original § 2255 court would have addressed two questions: (1) did constitutional error result in the conviction of an actually innocent person, and (2) did the district court have subject-matter jurisdiction since the indictment's did not identify a crime? : Does a corroborated claim of actual innocence constitute an extraordinary circumstance that justifies reopening the habeas proceedings to adjudicate the unresolved claims? : : QUESTION 3 , In the Rule 60(b)context,the Eleventh Circuit's standard forgranting a certificate of appealability conflicts with this Court's holdings. The Eleventh Circuit implicitly conducts a merits analysis, and denies the COA based on that review. Then, the appeals court exacerbates its error by issuing a boilerplate order that obfuscates its departure from 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2)'s requirements, as this Court defines them. Buck v. Davis, 137 S. Ct. 759 (2017); Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322 (2003). Should the Eleventh Circuit limit its COA analysis to the debatability of the threshold questions for Rule 60(b) relief? -i