Whether the lower court erred in its interpretation of the First Amendment's free speech protections

No question identified. : | Os A Qupepron (8) PRESENTED 1. Whether the district court was required, under Fed R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) to “-...construe the -_ complaint in a light most favorable to the plaintiff, accept all of the factual allegations as true, and determine whether the plaintiff undoubtedly can prove no set of facts in support of his claims oe that would entitle him to relief.’” Amadasu v. The Christ Hosp., 514 F.3d 504, 506 (6th Cir. 2008),quoting Columbia Natural Res., Inc. v. Tatum, 58 F.3d 1101, 1109 (6th Cir. 1995), 2. Whether the district court was required under Fed R. Civ. P. 12(F) to convert the Respondent’s motion into a summary judgment, under Rule 56, for not excluding matters outside of the pleadings that were accepted as true, by the district court? | 3. Whether the district court, under their abandonment argument, was required to meet the involuntary dismissal standard, under 41(b); and construed thorugh, Omstead v. Dell, minimal of four elements were to be satisfied; and whether the Petitioner’s initial responsive pleading was sufficient in addressing the Respondent’s assertions in their 12(b)(6) motion. 4. Whether the Petitioner under applicable treaty protection, can exercise his private right. ii PARTIES AND