Whether a 'bright line' rule requires post-deprivation notice and hearing for ex parte child seizures

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether a “bright line” rule requires post-deprivation notice and hearing for ex parte child seizures, as the FIFTH Circuit holds, or whether the right to notice and hearing is not clearly established, as the TENTH Circuit holds. 2. Whether subject matter jurisdiction exists for a federal claim using a plaintiffs initials, as is held by the FIFTH Circuit and several federal district courts, or whether subject matter jurisdiction is lacking, as the TENTH Circuit holds. 3. Whether the right to appeal under 28 U.S. C. §1291 is contingent upon the filing of a Rule 59(e) motion in the district court, as the TENTH Circuit holds, or whether the opposite is correct, as the FIFTH Circuit holds. 4. Whether sua sponte dismissal requires no prior notice to the parties, as the TENTH Circuit holds, or whether notice is required prior to dismissal, as the FIRST, SECOND, THIRD, FIFTH, SIXTH, SEVENTH, ELEVENTH and D.C. Circuits hold.