1) Is Mandamus and Injunctive Relief warranted in the instant request for the issuance of the All Writs Act 28 U.S.C. S 1651(a), due to the lower courts' (U.s. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit and the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi) continued denial of Petitioner's retained enumerated constitutional rights?

2) Does the First Amendment right to petition the Goverrment for redress of grievances allow Petitioner Frye to petition the lower Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, for a plain error review pursuant to Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure 52(b) for a record of fact of an incorrect calculation of the U.S.s.G., as decided by this U.S. Supreme Court in Rosales-Mireles.V.: U.S., 585 U.S. -, 138 S.Ct. 201 L.Ed.2d 376, 2018 U.S. LEXIS 3690?

3. Did the lower courts' order[s] in Petitioner Frye's diligent filing for a plain error review deprive Frye of his substantial Fifth Amendment rights of life and liberty, without due process of law, as this Court held in Rosales-Mireles V. U.S., 585 U.S. 138 S.Ct. 201 L.Ed.2d 376, 2018 U.S. LEXIS 3690?

4. Does Article Six Section Two of the United States Constitution require the lower courts in this case to afford Petitioner Frye his procedural due process (the minimal requirements of Notice and a Hearing guaranteed [a plain error review] by the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment, especially if the deprivation of a significant life or liberty interest may occur)?

5) Was the lower courts' inconsistent application of this Court's and their own holdings of the requirement of review as to plain error a violation of the Ninth Amendment of the United States Constitution, which states that the enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retaired by the People?

Whether the district court erred in dismissing petitioner's claims for lack of standing