1. IF-AN INDICTMENT OMITS AN ESSENTIAL ELEMENT AND A PRISONER FILES A §2255 A FEW MONTHS AFTER AEDPA'S ONE-YEAR STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS HAS PASSED, IN ASSERTING HIS INNOCENCE THAT THE INDICTMENT IS FUNDAMENTALLY FLAWED FOR FAILURE TO STATE A VALID FEDERAL OFFENSE; IS THAT PRISONER SUBJECT TO THE SHLUP v. DELO STANDARD OF PROOF REQUIRING INTRODUCTION OF "NEW EVIDENCE" WHEN THERE IS NO "NEW EVIDENCE" TO PRODUCE, BUT RATHER A SUBSTANTIVE CLAIM IS ASSERTED AS TO THE SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION IN REGARD TO THE INDICTMENTS OMISSION OF AN ESSENTIAL ELEMENT?

2. CAN A PRISONER PASS THROUGH THE GATE IF HE ASSERTS THAT THE INDICTMENT CHARGES NO VALID FEDERAL OFFENSE AND CAN PROVE THE INDICTMENT IS INSUFFICIENT?

If an indictment omits an essential element and a prisoner files a §2255 after AEDPA's one-year statute of limitations has passed, in asserting his innocence that the indictment is fundamentally flawed for failure to state a valid federal offense; is that prisoner subject to the Schlup v. Delo standard of proof requiring introduction of 'new evidence' when there is no 'new evidence' to produce, but rather a substantive claim is asserted as to the subject matter jurisdiction in regard to the indictment's omission of an essential element