Whether the Ninth Circuit's decision violated the principle of party presentation

QUESTIONS PRESENTED In United States v. Sineneng-Smith, 140 S. Ct. 1575, 1579 (2020), this Court unanimously held that “fiJn our adversarial system of adjudication, [federal courts] follow the principle of party presentation ... rely[ing] on the parties to frame the issues for decision and assign to courts the role of neutral arbiter of matters the parties present.” United States v. Sineneng-Smith, 140 S. Ct. 1575, 1579 (2020). It further explained that where a court of appeals injects new issues into an appeal not raised by the parties, it effects a “radical transformation of [the] case [that] goes well beyond the pale,” and unanimously reversed a decision of the Ninth Circuit that had done just that. Id. at 1581-52. While Sineneng-Smith was pending, the Ninth Circuit committed essentially the same error, save for some features that make the departure from the ordinary adversarial system even worse here. Sineneng-Smith came down the day after the Ninth Circuit had denied a petition for rehearing. The questions presented are: 1. Whether this Court should reverse the decision below under Sineneng-Smith. 2. Whether this Court should grant, vacate and remand in light of Sineneng-Smith. ii STATEMENT OF PARTIES AND