1. Whether the district court has exclusive jurisdiction in cases filed pursuant to 8 U.S.C. §
1421(c) (understandable from Ninth Circuit opinion) or concurrent jurisdiction with
USCIS (Second Circuit opinion) after USCIS issues the final denial of N-400 application.

2. Whether the cases filed pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1421(c) divest the federal court to remand
the naturalization petition to the agency to decide it after its final denial, (understandable
from Ninth Circuit opinion, contradicts Second Circuit)

3. Whether the later agency 's approval for naturalization petition after its intentional illegal
final denial of the Naturalization petition in the cases filed pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1421(c)
is void, null and invalid.

4. If the agency 's approval of a naturalization petition after it's intentional unwarranted final
denial is void, null and invalid in cases filed pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1421(c) and in the
case of petitioner received his certificate of citizenship, Whether the trial court should
issue summary judgment sua sponte to approve the naturalization petition, and order
USCIS to issue the naturalization certificate nun pro tunc in the date the petitioner took
the naturalization Oath.

5. Whether the naturalization certificate should be issued nunc pro tunc on the date of the
naturalization petition 's approval in the cases filed pursuant to 1421(c) if the agency
changed the date of the first intentional unwarranted denial to be a date of the
naturalization petition 's approval.

6. Whether the petitioner's intention to run for Congress is enough reason for the court to
grant Saleh 's sought an order to USCIS to issue his naturalization certificate nunc pro tunc,
or backdating, after USCIS admitted its mistake when USCIS changed its previous
intentional illegal denial to approval backdating 8\31\20 or issue the certificate of
citizenship backdating 6 months from the date of his applying for naturalization on
5\18\2018.

7. When the USCIS is committing intentional illegal denial of naturalization petition
because of the Illegal policy (CARRP) and admitting that by changing the denial date to
be an approval date, whether issuing a backdating certificate of citizenship should be an
available remedy as an equitable remedy.

8. If the USCIS naturalization petition's Approval is void after filing a case pursuant to
1421(c), because of no jurisdiction , whether the naturalization petition before the trial
court should not be dismissed for mootness.

9. If the CARRP is illegal and unconstitutional, and the CARRP disclosed that a USCIS 's
officer may delay then deny any petition of any relative (wife, sibling) to any person on
the security watching list and subjected to CARRP. Whether his seeking injunctive and
declaratory relief to enjoin CARRP is considered as a fact or as speculative.

10. When the USCIS is committing intentional illegal denial of naturalization petition
because of the Illegal policy (CARRP) and agency admitting that by changing the denial
date to be an approval date, Whether the apology should be an available remedy if no
other remedy is available to make good, the wrong done.

11. The US Supreme Court in Bivens explained that "where legal rights have

Whether the district court has exclusive or concurrent jurisdiction in naturalization cases filed under 8 U.S.C. § 1421(c) after USCIS issues a final N-400 application denial