Whether the Sixth Circuit abused its discretion by holding that a Second-in-Time 2255 Motion based on a new Supreme Court statutory interpretation ruling was a valid 2255 application and whether the district court had jurisdiction to adjudicate the merits

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED . QUESTON NUMBER ONE: Whether the Sixth Circuit abused its discretion by holding that Mr. Patel’s properly filed Second-in-Time 2255 Motion in which relied upon U.S. Supreme Court Ruling of a new statutory interpretation was a 2255 application, thus, did the district court have jurisdiction to adjudicate the merits since claim was unripe when he filed his first 2255 Motion in which is consistent with U.S. Supreme Court precedents in Slack, 529 U.S. 473, 486 (2000); and Stewart, 523 U.S. 637, 642 (1998) ? ii.