Whether the state of mind of the author should be considered when the receiver understood the threat or intimidation to be true

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1.] Whether the state of mind of the author should be considered when the receiver understood the threat or intimidation to be true. 2.] Whether C.0O. West's statement which misrepresented the facts to Petitioner was intentional to cause Petitioner to abandon his grievance process thereby making the administrative remedies unavailable. 3.] Whether C.O. Weems statement to Petitioner, that if he stopped writing grievances he would ride out was enough to intimidate a person of ordinary firmness to abandon his constitutional right to redress a grievance in order to get out of segregation. , 4.] Can a true threat occur or be received without including the act of _ violence. . : 5.] Did the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals misinterpret the Supreme Court's new precedence set by Counterman v Colorado 143 SCt 2106, 2110 (2023). 6.] Did the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals misinterpret the Supreme Court's precedence set by Ross v Blake 136 SCt 1850, 1853-54, 1860 (2016), where Mr. _ Bell was faced with machincation, misrepresentation of facts and intimidation thwarting his ability to the proper usage of the Michigan Department of Corrections grievance process. 7.] Did the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals overlook the evidence of mechination, where numerous grievances filed by Mr. Bell were never processed, therefore the remedy was routinely available, causing the issue to be exhausted. 8.] Did the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals fail to recognize that Mr. Bell addressed the Alleged unexhausted claim in a Declaratory Ruling under Michigan Adminstrative Code 791.1115 to the MDOC's Director's Office and the MDOC addressed the Declaratory Ruling, thereby accepting Mr. Bell process, and therefore making the issues exhausted in accordance with Woodford v Ngo 548 US 81, 90 (2006). 9.] Did Mr. Bell provide the MDOC with an opportunity to correct a wrong by filing the Declaratory Ruling. 10.] Did the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals misinterpret the Supreme Court's precedence set by Anderson v Liberty Lobby, Inc 477 US 242, 250 n.5 (1996), : where Plaintiff was not afforded the opportunity to complete discovery before prematurely granting Defendants’ summary judgment. : 11.] Did the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals misinterpret the Supreme Court's precedence set by Lewis v Casey 518 US 343, 384 (1996) and Bounds v Smith 430 US -vi 817, 828 (197) where Mr. Bell lost the ability to send and receive communications fron the judge and court and where Mr. Bell's did not have adequate assistance from a person trained in the law to prepare his legal documents. 12.] Did the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals wrongfully uphold the dismissal of Devid Theut where David Theut was a direct participant to Petitioner's substantial and procedural due process violaitons. . J -vii PARTIES All parties do not appear in the caption of the case on the cover pagel! A list of all