A. WHETHER THE COURT OF APPEALS ERRED AS A MATTER OF LAW IN ALLOWING THE DISTRICT COURT TO SUMMARILY DISMISS PETITIONER'S MOTION TO REOPEN A CASE PURSUANT TO HOUSTON V LAX YET US ALL LASS WITHOUT EITHER AN EVIDENTIALLY WEAKABLE OF TO CEPADO THE RELET, BYEALY LOREN A QUESTION OF FER TS INVOLVED IN THE PETITIONER CASE

B. WHETHER THE COURT OF JUDGMENTS ERRED AS A MATTER OF LAW IN ALLOWING THE DISTRICT COURT TO ABUSE ITS DISCRETION TO HEAR THE PETITIONER THE BLUNT TO APPEAL PURSUANT TO WOURTON J LACK YET US ALL LASS WHEN HE HANDED ITS NOTICE A APPEAL TO THE JUSTICE OFFERED TO BE HELD OF TO THE DISTRICT COURT

C. WHETHER THE COURT OF APPEALS ERRED AS A MATTER OF LAW IN ALLOWING THE DISTRICT COURT TO ABUSE ITS DISCRETION IN MAKING UNDEAS FILE 9 CO AND RULE 4 LALYLIGI OF THE FEL LULE OF AGQELUTE PRALPLEL IN AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL MANNER WHEN IT WAS INSTRUCTED THE DISTRICT COURT

Whether the Court of Appeals erred as a matter of law in allowing the district court to summarily dismiss the petitioner's motion to reopen the case pursuant to Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure without either an evidentiary hearing or a reasoned explanation of its decision