Whether a settlement agreement creates a liberty or property interest

QUESTIONS PRESENTED oo 1. Whether a settlement agreement entered into by an inmate and a State, which incorporates the mandatory language of the Interstate : Corrections Compact, Interstate Cotract between the recieving and sending States, and those States' laws and regulations -create a liberty interest . and/or‘ property-interest sufficient to warrant the protections of the Fourteenth Amendment? — . ; mY 2. Whether the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 8(a),(d) require a heightened factual pleading requirement for the allegations that the . Plaintiff is similiarly situated with other persons for the purpose of stating a plausible Equal Protection claim? And if so, does a claim : that alleges that an inmate is similiarly situated with all other inmates seeking’ minimum custody status and otherwise eligible therefore state . the required factual allefations to plead "similiarly situated" in a Plausible Equal Protection claim? : so 3. Whether a District Court in screening a complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1915A, is required toconsider all the allegations in a pro . ; se incarcerated litigant's pleadings combined, alleging the he suffered an adverse action by prison officials in retaliation for Free Speech activities to determine if the adverse actions were more than de minis? And if so, do the pleadings of a pro se incarcerated litigant that allege that he suffered adverse actions of denial of minimum custody, threat of transfer toan out of state prison, and loss of settlement agreement benefits allege more than de minimus adverse actions either individually or combined? ; 4. Does a claim that alleges that the loss of an inmate's legal documents by prison officials suffered actual injury through the denial. of parole, an appeal for the denial of parole, and an inability to file . a state court challenge tothe denial of parole, state the required factual allegations necessary to plead "actual injury" in a First Amendment interference with the access to the courts action? 5. Whether a District Court is required to allow an incarcerated pro se litigant to attempt to amend a complaint that it deems to be ; factually insuffieient during the screening pursuant to28 U.S.C. §1915A, when additional facts could be alleged to state a plausible claim? 6. Whether an incarcerated pro se litigant has a right to amend a complaint pursuant to FRCP 15(a) when a magistrate has issued a Report and Recommendation, .recommendingthe dismissal of the complaint , Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1915A for failure to state a claim, but prior to the dismissal and adoption of the report? And if so, whether an_ ; amended complaint so filed is the controlling complaint requiring the : Magistrate to withdrawal the original Report and Recommendation and/or sereen the amended complaint? ; . ° @ ; : . -ii: . ) .