Where the Tenth Cirit Cort sancticaed the Distrist Courts (ac.) failure to address
rebuttal of the pre sumption of Reciept atlourts urders), causing the Dissmissal
the Plaintiffs
of the Lase. The Plaintiff relred upon the Tenth Cir. Courts Standard of Law established in
"Wit V. Roadway Express, 136 F.3d 424 where the Tenth Cir. Specifically ruled when
Mr."Wift" filed an Affidavit disputing recieptof Documents, the A ffidavit was enough to
create a rebutfal of preuption o reept nd that the Distrat Cort erred n inog
Affidavit. Did the Tenth Cir. Court enter a Dicision in Conflict with the
Mr."WiH"
anrhe e
presumationf reciept of Court orders, which the Ostrct Court ignored?

Wheather the Tenth Cir. lourt properly determined the Issuefs Plaintiff raised
in the D.. moti to Alter Tugenent were not extrodinary Issnes warranting relief andIf
the Tenth Cir. lourt prpaly dotermined ther lacked Surisdiction to opinion on the
Issuels) Plaintiff raised Loncerning Appointment of Lounsel and stay of Lourt proceeding

Where the Tenth Circuit Court anchines the district court's (06) failure to address the plaintiff's rebuttal of the presumption of receipt of court orders, causing the dismissal of the case