Whether the district court is required under Rule 12(d) to exclude matters outside the pleadings or give notice of conversion to summary judgment

QUESTION PRESENTED 1. Whether the district court is required under Rule 12(d) of the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure to either exclude matters outside the pleadings or to give notice that the motion would be converted to a motion for summary . judgment under Rule 56; whether the failure to give notice violated Emiabata,s due process rights. The Four Circuit in here Decision Conflicts with this Court’s Precedents. 2. Whether denying a pro se litigant leave to ament the complaint is a violation of Rule 12(d)/Rule 56(d), and whether when denying a pro se litigant leave to amend the complaint as in here, a district court must provide a reason for that denial (as held by the Third, Seventh, Ninth, Eleventh, and D.C. Circuits),or whether a district court need not provide a justifying reason when denying a pro se litigant leave to amend the complaint if that reason is apparent from an analysis of the record(as held by the First, Fourth, Fifth, and Tenth Circuits). The question presented is: May a federal court ever grant a motion for relief from judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure in violation of Rule 12(d) or Rule 56(d) in a case involving legal error?