Jeannette Soto Santini v. United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia

Whether the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment is implicated when an unrepresented litigant alleges that she did not receive notice of material orders and judgments necessary to understand and challenge the disposition of her federal civil action, notwithstanding Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 77(d)(1), which requires the Clerk to serve notice of the entry of orders and judgments as provided by Rule 5(b).

Whether meaningful access to judicial review is impaired when an indigent, pro se litigant who relies upon paper communications alleges that she did not receive material orders necessary to seek reconsideration, respond to rulings, or meaningfully pursue appellate review.

Whether the dismissal of an indigent pro se litigant's action, under the circumstances presented here, deprived Petitioner of a meaningful opportunity to be heard where Petitioner alleges that she sought information concerning her case and requested Court documents but did not receive material orders before adverse action was taken.