Whether the First, Second, Fourth, Eighth, and Tenth Courts of Appeal have misinterpreted this Court's opinion in Pioneer Inv. Servs. Co. v. Brunswick Assocs. Ltd. P'ship, 507 U.S. 380, 391-92 (1993) by emphasizing one factor—"the reason for the delay"—over all other factors in contrast to the conclusions of the Third, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Ninth, Eleventh, and DC circuits which disagree with the primacy of that factor, with the result that the notice of appeal filed one day late by a white male police officer who took FMLA to help his father out in his business and who received no remuneration for the same, and who was terminated in retaliation for doing so, was precluded from being heard on the merits by the Fourth Circuit resulting in the affirmation of the summary judgment decision by the district court.

Whether the First, Second, Fourth, Eighth, and Tenth Courts of Appeal have misinterpreted Pioneer Inv. Servs. Co. v. Brunswick Assocs. Ltd. P'ship regarding the primacy of 'reason for delay' in determining excusable neglect or good cause for filing a late notice of appeal