realize the briefs are very factual i believe many of the problems here have their origin in factual matters the difficulty here is that the district court did not do the kind of review that the ninth circuit has twice asked to review to to perform and i believe its ability to perform that review has been impaired by the kind of evidence that the the core finding that the lanham act claims in a non lanham act claims are inextricably intertwined and you can't separate them out if the district court were correct in that finding so what would your feeling be of having a mediator like at the nickel and dime stuff i'd be happy to participate in mediation  second opinion that the second panel to grapple with these issues made its rulings we then went back to judge conti he lopped off another hundred thousand or so but in the mediation to pick up tragic reimers excellent point in the mediation was part of the mediation issue whether the were still separa got that far the mediator assigned by the circuit office conducted a number of telephone conferences separate and we never had an actual mediation session you have to have another sort of more specific question i guess again setting aside the core finding you make a what superficially i don't mean  i look at the number and i say jeepers that's pretty easy to quantify but then i went further and it appears to me that the fall of those injuries occurred before for the trial with a ten percent reduction is a reasonable estimate i think that if you if you look at how the case was litigated you could see different kinds of percentages and also by the way a different court finding the the whole case was about controlling the gracie name everything else was perth for all and while the legal issues on an infringement claim for a logo are similar to the legal issues on a claim for the gracie jujitsu mark that's really a first blush reaction the discovery had to do with who used it first what was going on in florida because horry and was never in florida are there territorial restrictions is there secondary meaning in the family as opposed to in the registrant and then of course the triangle design logo was an incontestable mark so defenses that are available on the gracie jujitsu mark never would come up in the context of the trial triangle design logo i think a more significant issue would be to look at how few references there are to the inflamed and the other difficulty to get back to the two hundred eleven items is this block billing problem and and we asked for the underlying time slips the individual ones they've never been produced they just record in order the applicant to produce them if we had those we would be in a much better position to identify what dollar amount of these individual  and persuade me that re trying to separate out given the block going which is unfortunate perhaps in many respects but what is it is a given that and i'll take that up with mr cause i don't see any real way anyone can ever say do anything except conclude that the lanham act claims are so intertwined and i've read all of your material length perhaps inordinately trying to see if i could sort him out i can't so i think we're stuck with that and after that it becomes a matter of picking and choosing individual items and trying to sort thing has got to come to an end this is i mean if we grant you what you want this is the third round of picking and choosing there is some limit i think and what's going to make sense in this case do you have any suggestion s how we can resolve this fairly but and what is your suggestion i first want to say i share the sentiment very much secondly i think it's absolutely unacceptable for the appellant to bear the burden of an of a really large fee claim because the fee applicant produces floc feeling and i think that in analysis that includes that these issues are intertwined which is we can't escape that that that's what is whether you want to not not everything is intertwined there are some clearly identifiable legal issues that are not intertwined and they have to be carved out i don't think that just because we're stuck with block billing records that the appellant has to pay everything victim of the way the moving party who had the burden presented his fear records and to the extent that some of these legal issues for example some of the defamation defenses are entirely different legal issues but to the extent they are different legal issues that need to be separated out then beyond that to address the real issue here is how much of th bill should be carved away because it had to do with the gracie jujitsu lanham act claim on which the fee applicant lost and i think part of that comes into the reno results analysis in terms of the relative importan the marks and part of that can be looked at in terms of how much of the energy of the case you can look at at the depositions we provided evidence on this by the way out of eight thousand pages discovery the depositions the witness time to come up with a number but i think the district court has to have a methodology that takes into account all of the kinds of activities break down the examples but again i ran into the block one problem other nickel dime items are general trial preparations as a cover up for when the attorney was actually down in los angeles and those issues can all be addressed i think by reference to magistrate what's happening to what's going on now in terms of fees lawyers are continuing to work these are continue to  discretion by i q and i don't think you're going to find any disagreement about that even in this panel certainly not least for me but the problem is and it may be a problem that we create because i can't square are two opinions are mine ok so that's we did what we did and the district court had to figure it out somehow but i sort of look in vain for a district court just reasoning behind a ten percent across the board deduction when there are in fact two hundred eleven there would have anything i mean if you could separate out i mean you could do that and the district court did not give any explanation for that sara legal right now i mean we're not talking about the huge dollars here but he didn't do them ensure that he didn't make any statement at all with respect to read then the now hours he really didn't come to scheme of things if the core finding holes out but i don't know in i don't think we can possibly make those judgments i would tend to agree that would be extremely difficult in listening to certainly doesn't give you a very good basis for for helping the trial judge and frankly just look my view is the only thing you've got going for you even at this point is a ticked off trial judge and the burden and the standard of review that we have to wrestle with as i indicated i'm pretty well convinced that on the on the files and on the records that the trial court's got to work with there isn't much can be done except to say that this stuff is also blended but then there's a number of nickel and dime issues which might or might not judge reimer might be directing virally that it's not going to add up to much but it might  a few hundred thousand dollars which for some people it might be something now are you inclined to help out if the court wanted you to well you know without requests like that's t itemize each item you know ten minutes here fifteen minutes here rather than just say the words trial preparation and i fancy that's essentially the block billing here one one might look at this and say well the child court was the best arbiter for lack of a better expression and seen blackmailing but seeing parties here and understanding them saying well i'm going to say that even the black going is not appropriate i'm going to still wear the fees because trial judge says i was there and i can understand what they did at that response to the court's inquiry as to what we can do or not do we've provided detailed records the first time around  complaint in compared all of that in the court was quite right about that but the legal issues are different and when a lawyer prepares briefs in arguments once the facts are stated the whole argument then turns to what to do about the legal issues it's not like they're in material i mean there is fact pleading but that's the first step after that the question is what's the right answer and i think you all must have spent some time discussing the right seat as we say here and we would say i saw the time i saw the effort and says i cannot distinguish one between the other and and the fact that it penalizes defendant for being the subject of litigation of which the core issue is alternately posited by the plaintiffs emerging these two i started out as a thank you see lawyer where the specificity requirements are fanatical and so to speak just to just to tell you so and for good reason so that in the closely examine and rock you actually know what to do right just briefly one of one of the things that creates a need for repel appellate review here is that the district court judge relied and duly on the statements in the cor another one of those areas is that none of the plaintiffs claims made it to trial actually some of the plaintiffs claims did make it to trial they did not make it to verdict they were the subject of a non suit  plaintiff filed this case to stop whoring in gracie from trying to control the gracie name and in evidence are dozens of letters sent to the many gracie family members telling them you can't use your name in jujitsu letters sent to magazines saying that they couldn't use the phrase crazy jujitsu letter sent to seminar promoters saying you can't use hands of off the map but i couldn't and it's very important to remember that that's what this case is about and that's why a ten percent allocation  inconsistent with the realities of the case and it's inconsistent with the result factors as well as from the economy of two ways it comes up when you determine how many hours were reasonably spent on  here separately when we get into what i would call the nickels and dimes they might not be so small there's a discrepancy i think the numbers around one hundred eighty three thousand about what fees were actually billed to the client versus what fees were included in the computer dump that was detached in support of the application one of the reasons it's really important to analyze the detail is because a few application is not an opportunity for the successful attorney to dump everything that he might have written off into an attorney fear ward and i think that needs to be looked at what has the client paid what did the attorney voluntarily adjust out in what hours were really build when they thought the client might have to pay the bill versus what ours were added back in later that have been written off part of that's the voided in the invoice that has been adjusted out but there are other issues it needs to be looked at and i don't believe it was looked at by the district court judge is no law that says you should get the benefit of their concessions through their  differently yes however i think that in attorneys adjustment of his bill could be probative on the issue of what's a reasonable fee and therefore i think it's information that well maybe i'm under a misimpression you say that wasn't looked at i thought it was the voided in the devoid invoice was deducted right but the problem is they use their computer d and in because it's a sort of a prevail rather than the actual bill it has other kinds of information it doesn't show what the charge is it's just what the value is at the post of christ you're saying that the district court and this was ignored the last time it was before the district court yes there's a statement on those documents fisa bill today it's around three hundred thirty one thousand or somewhere in that range and yet this is as of the end of the picture when five hundred eighty one thousand in fees were being asked for there's a discrepancy i think that the discrepancy is significant enough that it should have been inquired into we asked the district court to allow us to take discovery so we could inquire into if i don't want to make a proverbial federal case out of the theatrical but this is a lot of money it's a great deal of money not to oracle and microsoft but certainly to the individuals here on both sides and your request for