QUESTION ONE: DID THE LOWER COURTS VIOLATE SEMIEN 'S RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS UNDER THE 5th AMENDMENT DUE PROCESS CLAUSE BY FAILING TO FOLLOW SUPREME COURT PRECEDENT ESTABLISHED IN JONES V. BOCK, 549 U.S. 199(2007)?

QUESTION TWO: DID THE LOWER COURTS VIOLATE SEMIEN 'S 1st AMENDMENT RIGHTS "TO PETITION THE GOVERNMENT FOR REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES" BY FAILING TO FOLLOW SUPREME COURT PRECEDENT ESTABLISHED IN JONES V. BOCK, 549 U.S. 199 (2007)?

QUESTION THREE: DID THE LOWER COURT ERROR BY REQUIRING A "SPECIFIC " EMPLOYEE FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO BE NAMED IN AN ADMINISTRATIVE CLAIM UNDER THE FEDERAL TORT CLAIMS ACT (28 U.S.C, 1346(b)) BEFORE THAT CLAIM CAN BE PROPERLY BE CONSIDERED AND PRESENTED IN FEDERAL COURT CONFLICT SUPREME COURT PRECEDENT ESTABLISHED IN JONES V. BOCK, 549 U.S. 199 (2007)?

QUESTION FOUR: DID SEMIEN, BY THE INCLUSION OF THE "BROKEN CHAIR" IN HIS ADMINISTRATIVE CLAIM MEET THE JURISDICTIONAL THRESHOLD UNDER THE FEDERAL TORT CLAIMS ACT AND THIS COURTS DECISION IN JONES V. BOCK, 549 U.S. 199 (2007)?

Did the lower courts violate Semien's right to due process under the 5th Amendment due process clause by failing to follow Supreme Court precedent established in Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. 199 (2007)?