I. Whether a district court abuses its discretion by continuing a case following the Government's late disclosure of an expert witness whose testimony substantially strengthened its case, rather than granting Petitioner's motion to exclude that witness' testimony and proceed to trial as scheduled.

II. Whether a person knowingly possesses child pornography, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252A, on the date charged in the indictment based on images on his computer that were not accessible to the average computer user.

Whether a district court abuses its discretion by continuing a case after the Government's late disclosure of an expert witness, and whether possession of child pornography can be established by inaccessible computer images