1. Did the District Court abuse its discretion when it dismissed petitioner's
Rule 60 motion, which asserted evidence falsification and Fraud on the
Court, for lack of jurisdiction by recharacterizing the motion as a
unauthorized second habeas corpus petition?

2. Did the U.S. Court of Appeals exceed the scope of the analysis required
for a Certificate of Appealability when it stated "Appellant was not entitled
to relief under Rule 60(b) because he failed to show that there were 'extra
ordinary circumstances ' where, without [Rule 60(b)] relief, an extreme and
unexpected hardship would occur"?

3. Would a split appellate decision denying a rehearing enbanc request for a
Certificate of Appealability actually evidence that jurists of reastin do
find the District Court's resolution of the claims debatable or wrrong?

4. Does the continuous denial of a habeas corpus hearing to a petitioner - who
can establish his legal innocence on the existing record, but could not have
done so at an earlier time due to egregious misconduct by the government and
ineffective assistance from his defense counsel - give rise to a serious
Constitutional issue? If so, what are the avenues available to address
those Constitutional issues?

Did the District Court abuse its discretion when it dismissed petitioner's Rule 60 motion, which asserted evidence falsification and Fraud on the Court, for lack of jurisdiction by recharacterizing the motion as a unauthorized second habeas corpus petition?