1. Whether petitioner was afforded due process in the decisions rendered by the
Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, since that "if the underlying judgment is void, the
judgment based upon it is also void".

2. Whether the "lack of notice of the entry of judgment " and legal matter, was
overlooked in the decision, upon the circuit court statements: "mail from the district
court were returned as undeliverable " which was a conflict of decisions as established
by the United States Supreme Court in Jones v. Flowers, 547 U.S. 220, 226, 126 S. Ct.
1708, 164 L. Ed. 2d 415 (2006).

3. Whether Petitioner was denied the procedural due process because the circuit court
considered issues beyond the scope of the appeal which were available to the "court
only", where the Circuit Court did not "afford to the appellant an opportunity to
present [her] objections.

4. Whether The opinion of the Eleventh Circuit court of Appeal is in conflict with a
decision of the United States Supreme Court in the light of the decision rendered in
SHALALA v SCHAEFER 509 US 292, 125 L Ed 2d 239, 113 SCT 2625 (1993), which
this court erred finding "the notice of appeal was untimely ".

5. Whether the appellant allegations shall be accepted as true, if the government did
not traversed the appellant allegation in the "Initial Brief " filed in the Eleventh
Circuit Court of appeals.

Whether the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals denied procedural due process by considering issues beyond the scope of appeal and failing to provide proper notice of judgment