Whether – in a case where (1) the revocation of a criminal defendant's citizenship is mandatory as a result of a plea to a criminal conviction but (2) the defendant was told during the plea proceeding only that the Government "might" seek revocation – the 28 U.S.C. § 2255 "date on which the facts supporting the claim presented could have been discovered through the exercise of due diligence" trigger per se begins to run on the date that the Government sends a letter indicating an intent to bring a revocation proceeding that does not specifically state that the revocation proceeding is mandatory rather than discretionary.

Whether the 28 U.S.C. § 2255 'date on which the facts supporting the claim presented could have been discovered through the exercise of due diligence' trigger per se begins to run on the date that the Government sends a letter indicating an intent to bring a revocation proceeding that does not specifically state that the revocation proceeding is mandatory rather than discretionary