(1) Whether a federal district court's adoption of a Department of Corrections Administrative Regulation and implementing it in D.C.COLO. L. Civ. Rule 5.1(c), which limits only "unrepresented prisoners" 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaints to 30 pages, violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution?

(2) Whether the Tenth Circuit's heightened pleading standard for screening of prisoners complaints pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) is too burdensome, untenable, and/or unconstitutional?

(3) Whether the mutually enforcing effect of this heightened pleading standard, coupled with the arbitrary 30 page limit are unconstitutional as applied?

(4) Whether an inmate's filing of claims against prison officials and helping others to do so was protected activity under the First Amendment and/or whether an exception is required to the general rule that an inmate does not have standing to assert another inmates rights or interest, when without such exception the third party inmate's rights or interest cannot otherwise be preserved?

(5) Whether the holding in Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343 (1996) needs to be revisited due to federal courts interpretations that have emboldened Department of Corrections to carefully craft prison policies intended on hindering, deterring, and obstructing prisoners efforts to litigate complaints after their filing?

(6) Whether the Tenth Circuit improperly assed two strikes against Petitioner for his allegedly filing a single frivolous complaint and whether the finding explicitly contradicts the Tenth Circuit's own holding in Jennings v. Natrona Ctv. Pet. Ctr. Med. Facility, 175 F.3d 775, 780 (10th Cir. 1999)?

Whether a federal district court's 30-page limit on unrepresented prisoners' § 1983 complaints violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments