act as a fact finder and resolve our emphasis in favor of the moving party and against this the right to a detriment so she did not have a chance to develop the evidence and to have her day in court the most and the most egregious disputed fact which the district court ignored was who was the decision maker who made the decision to terminate the people in the pop department who were not affected by the restructuring whereas the african american ploys in the urban department they were moved out based on this restructuring accusation is that if there were going to be for colombia to get into precisely but the test is not whether they like mr ironically mr white and african american male who was put in that position the test is whether they had reasons to that would be true in a vacuum yana what defense did is they said you don't have a job anymore because we are limiting your position therefore we have no need for your services yet they bring in someone to do exactly what she was doing anything you know any entertainment business particularly people are constantly getting fired everyone is going everybody you don't so on of records it's actually fall and everyone look for somebody else to blame and they keep changing the heads in defending their position why they had to let her go when they haven't even reviewed her background that's completely inconsistent and does not support a a rational decision that we've analyzed it and therefore we're going to let you go they toronto terminations case when you when you get to the jury and you say we know it was because of race because nobody fell on the pine question because after the restructuring only african american employees were affected by the white people who worked in the pop department were not affected by this restructuring only to act in american morning and that's where where we differ where defended content well we brought in attack as well and the german have to decide whether they're in fact was an informed decision as to whether who should have a job and that's where that and these texts from a nation component again we think we think it's compelling that mr wyatt was she was working for us but she was look they wanted to do was focus more on the next jobs and whether it was right or wrong that's what they wanted to focus on and and they brought someone in i'm sure it's common that an apprentice will succeed at his or her mentor because the tap and all the time people make it to the supreme court after court probably for this quarter other court so it's not unusual for someone to exceed you know along the way so i suspect the spec we submit that terms of the qualifications of the evidence is there to support why it is  replacement now in terms of these other two or three persons that my colleagues my adversary says were let go also number one one of them with cynthia johnson house she was replaced by u c l a s the celsus african american female so that's one of the three that were listed and the undisputed evidence that the supplemental excerpts of record one twenty three actually exits record one twenty three all seventeen people in the urban music department were african american so to say othe two other persons who are african american who were displaced and there were no lights to displaced doesn't really prove anything i mean i think this restructuring only of the urban music i believe i believe that's what it was focused on i mean  have the phantom discriminator here there's a spectrum discriminator we don't know who this person is well it's either lisa alice and we submit the e mail shows that she did make that decision they be she didn't remember initially but it wasn't her must mean charlie walked because that's the one who was working with her or charlie wa points i mean she tries to put it in her declaration i was experienced in pop but all of her jobs involve urban music so there really is no similarly situated not an african american who was retained even if we went to the lake which i call the layoff test and here we're not on the left it's because we have a replacement and just the policy reason for it is unlikely that an employer that replaces somebody with a person of the same race or gender is discriminating it just doesn't make sense for the most part  can be drawn that sony basically eradicated this urban department that had acting american police and they put another african american in a hybrid position over that to try to profit again of the urban part and was acting america and actually restructuring you basically had urban music now being promoted by white people in the pop department kind of like the mov that just means that that's something for me to take to the jury for me to argue they say this is what they say i think this is what the venom and you have to figure it out that's always saying we have the at least have that opportunity to go before a jury to do that that's the only