Did the lower court incorrectly apply Christopher-v-Harbury

QUESTIONS PRESENTED + Did the lower court’s incorrectly apply Christopher v. Harbury in its attempt justify the dismissal of Petitioner’s Active Interference claims? Does | Harbury have any relevance to cases seeking prospective relief only? * Did the lower courts improperly apply Lewis v. Casey to Petitioner’s claims in the same manner? ¢ Should the district court have ruled on the challenges as to the constitutionality of state regulations that appeared to run contrary to applicable Federal judicial decisions? ¢ Did the Court of Appeals overlook procedural due process errors including but not limited to having combined an appealable dismissal Order with a nonappealable screening Order? * Despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, did the Court of Appeals decision to uphold the district court’s determinations.., amount to an unjust legal error requiring Reversal? * Did the Court of Appeals improperly apply Hebbe v. Pliler’s plausibility standard for the first time on appeal? ii ¢ Did the Court of Appeals’ minute Memorandum affirming the lower court’s dismissal of Petitioner’s Appeal, adequately address all of the claims in appellant’s comprehensive Opening Brief? ¢ Would it be safe to say that actively and . continuously erecting barriers for the sole purpose of interference with a prisoner’s right of physical access to prison Law Library.., constitutes an injury per se? And does this type of deprivation become a matter involving the impairment of personal liberty? * If there were actual pleadings deficiencies that ; rendered the complaint implausible, could that be easily attributable to being arbitrarily denied physical law library access during critical periods of time? ¢ Based upon the current three-circuit consensus, should the well-reasoned active interference doctrine become a constitutionally recognized exception to the holding in Lewis v. Casey? iii |