Was the Sixth Circuit panel's actions in changing and discarding Peggy Hampel's en banc petition appropriate?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED I Was it appropriate for the Sixth Circuit panel to improperly change and completely discard Peggy Hampel’s timely filed en banc petition and in doing so-violated their own rules including: 6 Cir. I.0.P. 35 (d)(2), (d)(2)(B), (g), 6 Cir. I.0.P. 40 (b), and/or 6 Cir. R: 35 (a)? i. Was it proper for the Sixth circuit panel to depart from General Tel. Co. v. Falcon, 457 U.S: 147 and/or Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, 564 U. S. 338 by disregarding the use of Mr. Donaldson’s forma pauperis pro se first amended complaint pleading and/or in the panel changing and misapplying the commonality standard established by this honorable Court ? Hi. Was it proper for the Sixth circuit panel to depart from the pro se liberal pleading standards as set forth in FRCP 8(a)(2), 8(f) and/or Estelle v. Gamble 429 U.S. 97, 106-including denying substantial justice as an intervenor to Peggy Hampel for her deceased: mother Vera Bay ? a