Whether the Third Circuit erred in dismissing the petitioner's false-arrest claim with prejudice, rather than without prejudice, in light of the favorable termination of the criminal charges against the petitioner

ESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Does the substantial holding in case on point Heck v. Humphrey, and Amaker v. Weiner, because the suit may be reinstituted should plaintiff's conviction be "expunged by executive order, declared invalid by a state tribunal authorized to make such determination, or called into question by a federal court's issuance of a writ of habeas corpus."' require the Third Circuit reviewing court to remand the case for the District Court to modify its judgement to reflect that Appellant's false-arrest claims should only be dismissed without prejudice? 2. Does the favorable termination of charges leading to appellant's arrest during trial proceedings by Wayne County Sheriff Department; SGT. Krempasky, require the Third Circuit to remand the case under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b), due to the District Court's Mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect; and favorable termination of false arrest criminal complaint incident number OTN T859968-4 Docket No.CR-212-2016? 3. Did the District Court incorrectly dismissed Appellant's false-arrest claim? Suggested Answer: YES! 4. Does the District Court judgment reflect that Appellant's false-arrest claim is dismissed without prejudice? Answer: NO! 5. Did the false-arrest by the defendants which were resolved with favorable termination of charges leading to arrest, defame the appellant because of it's slander, libel, by the defendant SGT. Krempasky, to a third person that harmed the appellant's reputation during his criminal trial? Suggested Answer: YES! 6. Was it an abuse of process, and discretion by the Third Circuit decision that appellant's petition for rehearing by the Court en banc, be denied. Because "Judge Nygaard's vote is limited to Panel Rehearing only"? Suggested Answer: ABSOLUTELY AND POSITIVELY YES!