Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the district court's denial of Petitioner's request as futile to supplement her pleading under Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(d), where the email at issue evidences government retaliation as a matter of law and satisfies this Court's Lugar test to demonstrate "state action" under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

Whether the Court of Appeals misapplied this Court's precedent in Lugar v. Edmondson Oil Co., 457 U.S. 922 (1982).

Whether the Court of Appeals erred by requiring Petitioner to provide actual proof of "state action" under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 by issuing what in effect is a fact finding—that the email was a "purely private act"—and in so finding, improperly raised Petitioner's burden to allege a plausible claim under this Court's precedence in Twonibly and Iqbal.

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the district court's denial of Petitioner's request to supplement her pleading under Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(d), where the email at issue evidences government retaliation as a matter of law and satisfies this Court's Lugar test to demonstrate state action' under 42 U.S.C. § 1983