Whether the Court of Appeals properly affirmed the District Courts December 18, 2017 decisions by which Petitioner's complaint was dismissed

Whether the Petitioner's complaint in the District Court had merit.

Whether Petitioner was entitled to proceed in forma pauperis in the District Court.

Whether Petitioner was entitled to proceed in forma pauperis in the Court of Appeals.

Whether the District Court correctly certified that the appeal was not taken in good faith.

Whether the District Court's incorrect certification that the appeal was not taken in good faith is justified by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3).

Whether 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) only applies to appeals by prisoners

Whether Rule 24 of the Court of Appeals permits appeals in forma pauperis

Whether good faith is lacking in the appeal.

Whether appellant has identified any non-frivolous argument on appeal.

Whether Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438,445 (1962), which permitted an appeal by a prisoner, is authority for denying an appeal by a non-prisoner

Whether Petitioner's request to proceed IFP on appeal should have been denied.

Whether the district court's December 18, 2017 memorandum and order of dismissal of the complaint was proper.

Whether a substantial question is presented on appeal, and the judgment of the district court should be summarily reversed.

Whether The district court was not required to issue summonses until after it screened the complaint and amended complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).

Whether even though no summonses ever issued, the clerk was required to issue the summons under the Rules.

Whether the Court properly failed to grant sanctions to Plaintiff

Whether the Court of Appeals properly affirmed the District Court's December 18, 2017 decisions