1. Whether Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b)(1)(B) — which requires a motion and a
showing of "excusable neglect " to consider a filing after a deadline — may be bypassed
without motion or findings, thereby nullifying its mandatory gatekeeping function.

2. Whether a federal appellate court may allow Rule 12 dispositive motions to proceed
despite being untimely under Rule 12(a), without requiring defendants to move under
Rule 6(b) or show cause, effectively making the deadlines discretionary.

3. Whether permitting such silent deadline forgiveness introduces non-uniformity across
federal courts, undermining the purpose of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and
inviting widespread procedural abuse.

4. Whether a decision like this, published and indexed on govinfo.gov and PACER, has
nationwide persuasive authority and institutional impact, regardless of its "unpublished "
designation, warranting this Court 's intervention.

Whether federal appellate courts may bypass mandatory procedural deadlines under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 6(b)(1)(B) and 12(a) without requiring motions, findings of excusable neglect, or cause showings, thereby nullifying gatekeeping functions and creating non-uniform application across federal courts