1. Is the use of 3rd Cir. L.A.R. 27.4 to effectively convert an appeal as of
right into a discretionary appeal, which denies an appellant the
opportunity to fully brief the issues and fails to review the record below
despite appellate jurisdiction being present, inconsistent with the
Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure and 28 U.S.C. 1291, 1292(a)(1)?

2. Would having papers reviewed by a Large Language Model Artificial
Intelligence, such as Grok or ChatGPT, provide a better assurance of
Due Process than copied-and-pasted boilerplate opinions?

3. When the U.S. Department of Justice has made findings of a custom,
policy, and practice of a state agency, which deprives a group of people
of their rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act and
Rehabilitation Act, should a preliminary injunction issue to mandate
accomodations of those people's disabilities by a reasonable change to
that custom, policy, and practice?

4. Is the New Jersey Anti-Polygraph Statute, N.J.S.A, 2C-40A-1, pre
empted by either the Americans with Disabilities Act, the
Rehabilitation Act, and/or the Employee Polygraph Protection Act?

Is the use of 3rd Cir. L.A.R. 27.4 to effectively convert an appeal as of right into a discretionary appeal, which denies an appellant the opportunity to fully brief the issues and fails to review the record below despite appellate jurisdiction being present, inconsistent with the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure and 28 U.S.C. 1291, 1292(a)(1)?