Whether the lower court erred in denying the pro-se plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissing the appeal

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED ~ : The lower Court has not permitted the pro-se to proceed with this action . in forma pruperis, and thus subject said “Motion Statement” with the attached “Exhibits” in ; : support thereof, to screening under 28 US.C. § 1915(e), when events not contemplated by the . moving parties herein, render enforcement of the judgment “inequitable” as apparent in this particular case under the Civil Rights Act (42 §1983), as amended, and the adapted federal law and regulation —” Resident rights” (42 C.F.R. § 483.10 et seq.). : 1. Whether it appears from the filed “Complaint” and the subsequent filed “Motion Statement” that there can be no set of facts, which entitled Plaintiff-Appellant pr-se to the relief of its claim of “Exceptional Circumstances” under Rule 60(b)(6). As specifically cited by said plaintiff, which said Rule provides that the court may relieve a party from a final judgment for “any other reason justifying relief from the operation of the judgment” the same being granted equitable power to do justice in a particular case where extraordinary circumstances to be present. F.ed. R. Civ. P. 60 (b)(6). 2. Whether the underlying claims of the pro-se of dismissal of its _ ; Motion Statement of the facts lacks merit and/or is similarly deficient. Which the lower Court, upon said Appellant, pro-se moved for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and thus, Ordered that the motion is DENIED, and the appeal is DISMISSED, because it _ “lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact, [citing, see 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)]. 3. Whether it appears from the subsequent filed “Motion Statement” and “Motion For Panel Rehearing or Rehearing En Banc” that the pro-se 5 “claims”. ; does not lacks an arguable basis in law, when it is “based on an undisputable meritless ; . legal theory,” upon which relief may be granted. And when it appears beyond doubt that said pro-se can prove a set of facts in support of his claims, which ; would entitle him to relief under Rule 60 (b)(6).