Whether the COA improperly held in conflict with other courts that the Petitioner did not show good cause to excuse procedural default and allow for a permissive extension to cure failure of service

Questions presented for review: 1. Whether the COA improperly heldin conflict with the decisions of other courts that the Petitioner did not show good cause to excuse any procedural default in order to allow for a permissive extension to cure failure of service in violation of Fed.R.Civ.P 4(). 2. Whether the Tenth Circuit COA improperly held that a good faith effort had not been shown by the ; Petitioner to cure the failure in service when the Courts’ own conduct contributed to the default in mismanagement and errors in the case. 3. Whether the Tenth Circuit COA improperly held that the Petitioner was expected to act on reissue of service before being told to do so by the Court in a lawful order. 4. Whether the COA improperly held that Federal Express is not a permissible way to serve a federal ; agency. See Fed. R. Civ. P 4@(2). 5. Whether the Court of Appeals (COA) improperly held that Petitioner could not herself take the packages to the mail facility because she is a party relying on Fed. R. Civ. P 4(c)(2) which would put a substantial burden on her as a pro se litigant. 6. Whether the 10% Circuit District erred or mismanaged Petitioners’ case and showed favoritism to outside interests such as Jones Day law firm _ and/or interference from the President of the United States. :