Whether the district court erred in dismissing petitioner's case with prejudice and failing to certify any issue for appellate review, depriving petitioner of due process under the 4th Amendment

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED Petitioner ProSes Question +o MIS Honarable Court Vedsaurdins final TUSeMENnt UNndEr W3ht OF DUE Process Clause of The 4th. amendment of the Constitution. LSSUED 1. EQuUitable +olliMS on A Liberty TSSue And ne Ability of the THntiSent +0 Collaborate fact EXercise pue Diligence. from institution 1h Admin | Segregation. TSSueiQ. With respect to Entry of Fihal Tuddement In 4his Actioh failure of DiStrice Co Ure to Certify any issue for ApPellate Review. ond fundemendal liberty rssue Pertaining To the nue Process ClauSe of \H4In, Amendment a TSSUE: 3. Petitioner filed a timely response Lor awe 7 ond extensSioh Directives and demonstrated hue olil rence in Pursuiny a lberty IsSuePetitionep, Pres — Ents this Court With fundemental lib erty iSSues Needed to overcome District Courrs AeciSion fo, SumMmMary TudSement based Oh A Pro¢ -14 Rule bob) eceedutal decay TSSUEZ 4. original issue of fundemental liberty rssue. based ohn Sufticency of Evidence. Never of eCi'ef ed by DiStHiC+ Court due to Procedural flaws Presen 45 4 liberty 1 SSue. LSSUE: petitioner did not meet due date for Av Peal by I, days AFTER after piste Court dismissed Thus Case with presUudice ane No £Lurdrer pyoceedin4s, Petitioner Lilew a mot— -~ivn Lor Leconcideraqtroh. ThStead of WoTICEe of AY Peal, Motion WaS ALLSo ihterPed-o af a filiky of 60%), By the Aime ZT Jot prupep Wel 40 file Correct MOTIiCe OFLAP Pea! TZ messes due date by Slewh dar in Li tty cikeyst gn d Dist hce CT,