Is not specifically naming non-dispositive factors, when actually arguing the factors, a waiver of claims?

question presented is: Is not specifically naming non-dispositive factors, when actually arguing the factors, a waiver of claims? I. A “child with a disability’ under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”) must (i) have a qualifying disability; and (ii) “by reason thereof, need[ ] special education and related services.” 20 U.S.C. § 1401(8)(A). The second question presented is: When an IDEA-eligible child with a disability is inappropriately disqualified from special education, has a legally cognizable injury occurred? Il. The third question presented is: When a child with a disability has not received the appropriate special education services in an identified area of need, is a parent required to show regression or de minimis progress to be entitled to substantive relief? IV. The fourth question presented is: What is the appropriate standard of review concerning questions of whether a student made appropriate progress under the IDEA?