whether the United Stater District Court of Northern California abused ito discretion by construing Pettioners Federal Rules of Civ.l Procedure Rule 60 (b) motion to be a "succesoive petition"?

2. whether the United States District Courti ruling was contrary to the clearly established law of this Court's decisions in Gonzalez v. Crosby, 545 U.S. 524, S3S (2005) and/or this Courts decision 1n Buck v. Davis, 137 S.Ct. 759, 766 (20r7) and Lijeberg v. Health Servs. Acqusiton Corp. 486 U.5. 847, 864 (19B8)

3. whether the United Stater Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circut's decison, denying petitioners reguest for a Certificate of Appealability on the United States District Court of Northern Californa's ruling above was objectively unreasonablel and "contrary to"clearly established federal laws?

4. whother Petitoner is entitled to have his Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Bule 6o (b) motion adjudicated oni the ments?

Whether the United States District Court abused its discretion by construing Petitioner's Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 60(b) motion as a 'successive petition'