1) Whether the Sixth circuit made clear error when it concluded that the District Court did not err or make s;s,s.r,s1isBosfnis. ts:.ss1::ssLJs!?sr?rsr that court conviction relief by unlawfully stripping him of his legal documents, material(court documents) by way of retalitory transfer for engaging in First Amenedment protected conduct?

2) . Whether _Jurist of Reason conclude or find it debatable that, plaintiff Rose has presented a valid access to the court clans with a non-frivolous underlying claim that warrant relief?

3) . Whether Jurist of Reason would conclude or find it £h3fc th? ?rsvious rule 50(b)(6) motion that ^ S fubmitfced to the district Court and the Sixth Circuit in an attempt to remedy the issues in this case were erroneously denied, especially considering that Mr. Rose was in compliance with controlling Sixth Circuitwould law?

Whether the Sixth Circuit erroneously denied relief for a prisoner's claim of retaliation and denial of access to courts through unlawful stripping of legal documents