Whether courts should protect plaintiffs from paying defendants' expenses from previously dismissed actions

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW ; 1, Whether the Court should resolve the following question for which the Courts of Appeals are split (including the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit of last resort in this case): should the courts : effectively protect plaintiffs from paying defendants’ expenses from previously dismissed action so refiled cases can be decided on merits rather than technicalities, in view of Herring v. City of Whitehall, 804 F.2d 464 (8th Cir. 1986) precedent. 2. Whether the Court should determine the priorities in the case of potential conflict between two (or more) Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, in this case FRCP 60(b), specifically FRCP 60(b)(1)-(3) and FRCP 41(b). 3. Whether the Court should enforce the desired uniformity of opinion by setting guidelines which would eliminate occurrences when the opinion of the lower court or even an individual judge seemingly contradicts their own from similar unrelated case. 1