Whether the 5th Circuit abused its discretion in denying habeas relief based on the statute of limitations and summary judgment issues

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED . 1). In an appeal of a 2254, at the "C.0.A." stage, when the U.S. District oy Court: accepts the affirmative defense of ' Statute of Limitation violat: ion‘ that's intertwined with petitioner’s inef ective assistance of counSie] claim, denying habeas relief, as a summary judgtient, did the 5th Circuit abuse it's disczetion, when the court failed toxfocus ion; issues of "Time-barr'' and “Summary judgment''?(the only issues addressed in the lower court's "C.0.4." determination). 2).\inder, the “A-E.D.P.A.'s" one-year statute of limitations, petitioner re wasn"t afforded the 6th Amendment's protection under Strickland v. Washington due to counsel filing a "Anders' brief" pursuant to Anders v. California, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (196/) indicating no "Notice™ of all the facts: that can be charged upon the attorney, not given to petitioner; was it an abuse of discretion of the district court to not find counsel's "Anders’ brief", as a "impediment to filing an application" umder 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(B)? 3). With regards to a no merits brief under Anders v. California, 87 S.Ct. . 1396, can a claim of insufficiency of the evidence pursuant to Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979), ever be "Wholly frivolous" or without merits?