Should the federal courts, in an effort to serve the purposes of the public's interest in gaining access to justice, be following timeliness rules applicable to appellate review that are most strictly construed, versus allowing the flexibility to exercise rights of review in an orderly, and reasonably calculated duration from commencement of an action through finality?

And if so, i.e., that a stricter interpretation applies, does that level of strictness of construction constitute misapplication of principles of jurisdiction which will lead to burdensome review which, in turn, negatively impacts the proper, broadly consistent application of Fed. R. App. P. 3 and 4, and Fed. R. Civ. P. 59, and 60?

Whether federal courts should follow strict timeliness rules for appellate review or allow flexibility to exercise rights of review in an orderly, reasonably calculated duration