Whether federal courts are violating Erie R. Co. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64 (1938), as well as principles of federalism, in uniformly refusing to seek answers from a state's highest court on state law questions relating to COVID-related insurance coverage;

(2) Whether the phrase "direct physical loss of or damage to" requires an immediate, perceptible, and tangible destruction or deprivation of property;

(3) Whether the courts below properly applied Oklahoma's rules of contract construction with respect to insurance policies;

(4) Whether the phrase "direct physical loss of or damage to" is ambiguous; and

(5) Whether the Virus Exclusion precludes coverage.

Whether federal courts are violating Erie R. Co. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64 (1938), and principles of federalism in uniformly refusing to seek guidance from a state's highest court on state law questions relating to COVID-related insurance coverage