I. Are 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motions raising due process vagueness challenges to fixed sentences imposed through application of the pre-2005 mandatory career offender Sentencing Guideline's residual clause timely when filed within one year of Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015)?

II. Do Tennessee's 1982 armed robbery or aggravated assault statutes fail to constitute crimes of violence under the force clause of the pre-2005 mandatory career offender Sentencing Guideline?

III. Does the federal armed bank robbery statute fail to constitute a crime of violence under the force clause of the pre-2005 mandatory career offender Sentencing Guideline?

IV. Does the commentary at U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2 cmt. n.2 (1995), fail to provide an independent basis for a crime of violence finding, should this Court hold the residual clause of the pre-2005 mandatory career offender Sentencing Guideline enhancement void?

Are 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motions raising due-process-vagueness challenges to fixed sentences imposed through application of the pre-2005 mandatory career-offender-sentencing-guideline's residual-clause timely when filed within one year of Johnson-v-United-States