Whether the lower court improperly applied procedural rules that prevented a full and fair review of the petitioner's substantive claims involving fraud and pleading requirements

No question identified. File: Total Pages: 1 ALN THE UNITED STATES SUPREME. COURT APPCTFATION U0, 24 ALOT Q. Appellort [Pebtioner VA Eveveth Cucett Gort of App vals Non M. Ley Broce BeeHett Gse No: 25-10142-F Siete of Florida, Appellees/ fas Porderts MOTION FoR LEAVE T EXCEED PACE LEME IN CERTIOR ARE PETITION | Konomble court to exceed ta YO pose limit provided ta Rule 33 @) ). QD. All issues prosented mvolva dver 150 relevent mrebus and oo torities to Horoughly provide extiHemerct ad just Fiechon far Hir courts practing of The Petition Fr tari} of Grtrorari, 3, All acponacts are on point oad cpply te He case, facts ond cheorolagy of everts te lecd this cares Chollenses te be before tir Nonorebe Gort, 4, Petitrorar Was graciously Given PO days extersion of time, but did aot recaig He court ar der, rendered on May Hoar ot] Mey 20, 2028, Hh dey later with XW decdlirg dede of Tone “soar Sy Petthenr preys HG Court fale jude nothin of He OPPS Ing parties hud Fath ork acerpt Ais Clouas thethe moustinclude all relevert frets and og vaacte relectris te Fraud on the court ond te Ariphlond pleediig eg uiremarts, punseaat to Rule 4 () Red r.cev proc, b, According ly, Petctioner repuerts leove to exceed He 9G POG FOOD werd [imetin Aus Petotion Fwritef Grttoreri, faspectfolly Sobmitted: 4 PROVIDED BY LIBERTY Cl AUG 15 2025 FOR MAILING RECEIVED JUN 11 2995 [oz | QFFICE GF Us rt vin UPHEM