Whether the lower Courts are properly interpreting and implementing the
Supreme Court decree about jurisdiction and fraud upon the Court under Rule
60(d)(3)(l) Motion.

Whether the District Court where the fraud has occurred, has completed its
decision making process, and whether the result of that process does not lead to a
miscarriage of justice.

Whether a Court of Appeal abuses its discretion in refusing to permit
consideration of a vital intervening legal development when the failure to do so
precludes a District Court from ever giving any adjudication of Petitioner 's Rule
60(d)(3)(l) on the merits.

Whether the public has a right to have confidence that all lawyers who are
members of the Bar are deserving of their trust in every transaction.

Whether the public welfare demands that the agencies of public justice be
not so impotent that they must always be mute and helpless victims of deception
and fraud. Hazel-Atlas, 322 U.S. 238, 64 S. Ct. 997, 88 L. Ed. 1250 (1944) Id. at
322 U.S. 246.

Whether the lower Courts are properly interpreting and implementing the Supreme Court decree about jurisdiction and fraud upon the Court under Rule 60(d)(3)(1) Motion