1. Does a district court's denial of Section 3599 representation services under the wrong legal standard constitute a defect in the integrity of the proceedings under Rule 60(b), even though the district court previously ruled on the merits of the habeas claims?

2. Did the Fifth Circuit err by holding that a court cannot consider merits-based extraordinary circumstances under Rule 60(b)(6) because such arguments render a Rule 60(b) motion a successive habeas petition?

Whether the denial of Section 3599 representation services under the wrong legal standard constitutes a defect in the integrity of the federal habeas proceedings