Roy Franklin Echols v. CSX Transportation, Inc.

The United States Federal Courts have Denied the " Independent Question of Great Public Importance " which no other inferior court will answer.

1. Was the Petitioner Denied Access to the Federal Courts to address the violation of Railroad Corporate Advertisement Law, where extenuating factors existed which justified this civil action?

2. Was the Petitioner Denied Access by the Federal Courts by denying reason for their refusal to address the question of entitlement to Petitioner relative to CSX's negligent exposure to silica dust in the Railroad workplace environment?

3. Was the Petitioner Denied Access by the Federal courts to serve Summons by conjoining Rule 59(e) together with the ' Petition for Issuance of Summons * compelling CSX to produce medical examinations in their possession.?

4. Was the Petitioner Denied Access by the Federal Courts to appoint counsel under applicable lawy because he is unskilled inllawaand lacks the legal knowledge to file the appropriate pleadings? ( SSe: Exhibit i ).

5. Was the Petitioner Denied Access to the FourthUUSS.C - Circuit to Grant his motion to Stayy and Access to the Issuance of Summons after he provoded Supplementallmedical reports related to occupational exposure at CSX Transportation?

6. Question Of Great Public Importance? Did the violations of the Constitution of the United States cause prejudice to E Echols under the Federal Civil Rights Act and Federal Statutory Laws &

7. Was the Petitioner Denied Access by the Federal Courts seeking restitutionary redress as required by the 0.S.C.A, CONST. AMEND. 5th, 6th? 13th, 14th, 15th, Ind 19th, necessaryy to prevent manifest injustice?