Whether the trial court erred in denying petitioner's timely-filed Rule-59e-motion

QUESTIONS PRESENTED ARE 1. Whether the trial court erred by failing to accept petitioner’s 59e motion as timely filed where it had been received by clerk of court within time constraints as set forth in Fed.R.Civ.P. 5(d)(2), thus denying petitioner constitutional guarantees of the 1st, 5th, and 14 amendments of the US constitution? 2. Ifa pro se litigant submits a timely Rule 59(e) motion, and the presiding judge, upon inadvertently receiving it, consciously decides not to facilitate the filing process, thereby depriving the iitigant of the opportunity to potentially rectify errors of law or fact and appeal the court's judgment, is this action by the judge in violation of the litigant's constitutional rights to due process? 3. Whether the district court erred when determining the loss and restitution amounts for Petitioner’s sentence when the relative conduct used was not based on criminal conduct, specially when Petitioner's plea agreement only agreed to the use of restitution for victims harm by “criminal activity”. vi