Whether a federal court has Subject-Matter Jurisdiction under the Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 6(b)(2) or any other federal law to "Order, Adjudge, Decree " or "Affirm " that a ten-months-after post-judgment motion pursuant to the Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 60(b)(4) for "Relief f rom a Judgment or Order' 1'' is a "Motion to Alter or Amend a Judgment " pursuant to the Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 59(e), and whether in so doing the inferior courts deprived Petitioner 's fundamental constitutional rights.

Whether it is a violation of Muslim Petitioner 's First Amendment Freedoms of Religion when the inferior courts "Order, Adjudge, Decree " or "Affirm " that Petitioner 's references and expression of his belief in the sacred teachings of Islam on sexual intercourse virginity, chastity, and purity until after marriage are "Scatological " meaning "Excrements , Feces, Cacas, Poop, Shit", "crude ","obscene ","inappropriate ","salacious ", "Vulgar ", "Exotic ", "indefensible ", "foul", "Profane ", "Misconduct ", and "Frivolous "

Whether it is violation of Muslim Petitioner 's Fourth Amendment rights when federal Judges who are Subject Judges in Petitioner 's complaints of Judicial Misconduct pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§351-364 extrajudicially enlist third parties for an endeavor to surreptitiously make "Physical Contact with ", kidnap, ambush, murder, and/or assassinate Petitioner in response to the said Judicial Misconduct Complaints.

Whether a federal court has subject-matter jurisdiction to order relief from a judgment under Rule 60(b)(4) and Rule 59(e), and whether such actions violate fundamental constitutional rights