Whether the Supreme Court will consider the merits of the decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

QUESTIONS FOR REVIEW Whether, the Supreme Court will consider the merits . of the decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the FEDERAL Circuit, pursuant to Pro Se plaintiffs Motion upon the NJ District Court, pursuant to Permission to Appeal Case [3:19-cv-05945], by FRCP Rules 60(b)(6), and Rule 60(d)(1); wherein, were denied. Whether, the Pro Se Plaintiff was righteously provided ‘provisional remedy mandate law,’ to Case [3:19cv-05945], which provides the Standards, that upon any Rule 12(b)(6) Dismissal, failure to state a claim, a provision . for amendment, “must be provided” before dismissal action can be upheld: [Phillips v. County of Allegheny], (3"4 Cir. 2008). Whether, such refusal actions by the lower courts are Exceptional, Extraordinary Circumstance for Certiorari, per i. [Phillips v. County of Allegheny], (3 Cir. 2008). Whether, this initial case (along with its consolidated case), was wrongly dismissed; whereby, Pro Se Plaintiff was never provided any amendment whatsoever nor any Standards of the mandate law [Phillips]. Plaintiff did not amend, did not stand, was not given Opinion Statement why amendment would be futile. Whereby whether, request directed to the NJ District Court per “Permission to Appeal,” is reasonably, righteously just. Whether, subsequent claims also dismissed in a subsequent, timely brought, separate cause of action case, consolidated therein, the FEDERAL Appeal Case: No. [2023: 23-1020 and 23-1022] was wrongly, incorrect and , unjust. Whether, all claims were righteously adjudicated. ii. Whether, this Court has the power to justify relief, : and relieve this Pro Se Plaintiff of judgement. Whether, exhausting remedies to request to Reopen Case, and Permission to Appeal, now again, in following, reopens further Case in re-new, Petition for Extraordinary Writ of Mandamus. Whether, the ‘distinct mandate law,’ egregiously ° withheld from Pro Se Plaintiff, which egregiously removed her judicial rights and due process rights is Righteous or , Just; wherein, Certiorari aids in appellate jurisdiction. iii. :