Whether discovery violations can constitute fraud on the court

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW 1. Whether discovery violations can constitute the type of extraordinary circumstances which would justify relief on the basis of fraud on the court, and what test should be used to determine whether fraud on the court has occurred in circumstances involving discovery violations. 2. Whether the district court abused its discretion by denying Burton’s Rule 60(b)(6) motion and her Rule 37 motion, which the district court construed to allege fraud on the court, where it failed to consider the merits; applied an inapplicable time limit; failed to consider the factors mandated by Congress in the Speedy Trials Act; failed to decide whether Defendants or their attorneys committed spoliation of evidence; failed to decide whether Defendants or their attorneys violated policy or law; failed to decide whether Defendants or their attorneys committed discovery violations; failed to decide whether Defendants or their attorneys acted in bad faith; relied on clearly erroneous factual determinations; failed to consider that Burton was prejudiced; applied an inapplicable one year time limit; failed to consider Burton’s inability to bring the motion within one year; failed to adequately articulate its reasoning for the decision; and failed to consider the public importance of this case. 3. Whether the appellate court sanctioned the district court’s abuse of discretion by failing to meaningfully review the case. ii LIST OF DIRECTLY