Should a Pro Se Plaintiff be granted special considerations by Federal Judges based on their lack of experience with the Federal Rules?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Should a Pro Se Plaintiff be granted special considerations by Federal Judges based on their lack of experience with the Federal Rules? : In this case the Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgement was granted in an opaque 20 page ruling that was based on the simple fact that | had not exchanged a critical piece of evidence (my medical records) correctly during discovery, and instead exchanged a hyperlink to the documents instead of an actual hard copy. 2. Did the Appeals Court error when it found the District Court acted properly when it quashed my medical records from the docket, and then later ruled that the medical records had not been properly exchanged during discovery and dismissed my case based on this fact? 3. Should individuals be liable for whistleblower retaliation under the False Claims Act? The Plaintiff will argue that individuals should be held tiable in order to protect the Shareholder’s interests in publicly owned companies and that in this specific case there are additional new individuals that have put shareholders of an unrelated public company at risk in order to continue to harass the Plaintiff during this Appeals process by sending an April Fools Day Joke job offer, purporting to 4 « + be from the unrelated public company, to the Plaintiff on April 1st, 2024, while , this Writ was being prepared (