Whether the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, under the "abuse of discretion" standard of review, should have reversed the district court's judgment summarily dismissing Petitioner's No Land Writ Amended Complaint on the premises of being too long and failing to comply with the district court's Order granting him leave to file an Amended Complaint when the intermediate sending of the record reveals that the district court's guidelines or standards of review and presents a failed showing that Petitioner received neither full or fair consideration of his claims from the district court during either the initial traversal and returned proceedings, nor was he afforded the mandatory process on the behalf ently by the district court upon completion of his filing fee payment as prescribed under 28 U.S.C. Approximately 20 months before the district court.

Whether Petitioner's pro vision of 42 U.S.C. Limitation of Actions (§ 1983) permits a Pro Se Prisoner/Plaintiff's filing a motion for relief as to allegedly Safe and Humane Conditions of Confinement based on instruction of a prison where he showed/forced detects Constituting a Continuing tort claim for deformation as justified.

Whether Petitioner's cause of action arising by allowing for the Aerosolide produced by the prisons does not feed by resulting in loss Continuation of inmates' living Areas and sleeping quarters during reporting of the prisons boiler office(s).

Whether the Court, Under the Amendments Civil and Inhumane Punishment, various decrees of protection of inmates from Confinement under Conditions which present known risks of exposure(s) to environmental defects Smoke, Friable Asbestos, mold, Excessive Heat and Lint particles in the Air and human Gasses as well as fire hazards existing do the amendments protections apply in cases with the particular Nationwide through dark levels of Confinement of inmates' in modes Cruel Punishment causing loss has addressed issues dealing with harm such as risk of harm, stems from recurring incidents of exposure to Carcinomas and sleeping quarters.

Whether the Guadalupe County Correctional facility and Penitentiary, notwithstanding any real or perceived defects in its as they relate to the Custodian of official/personal confined prisoners concerning Capacity Liability (C-1's) of Petitioners pleading the individual Defendants, Petitioner and the prisons Inmate population, in general, the Amendments protections through the Courts enforcement of such as US injunctive relief against the defendants commanding that the prisons structural inadequacies be addressed so as to avoid unnecessary contamination of inmates' living areas and sleeping quarters until toxic levels of Carbon Monoxide, especially where incidents are liable with the addition of a proper ceiling in each of the respective cell rooms and installation of appropriate flue-pipe on each of the boilers.

Whether the court of appeals, under the 'abuse of discretion' standard of review, should have reversed the district court's judgment summarily dismissing Petitioner's pro se Amended Complaint