pursue their claims for statutory damages a penalty of no less than one hundred dollars claims here are only seeking that minimum for the statutory damages the damages provisions of the of c it be moved back to state court because you didn't have heard of the three stadiums that are under the seven circuits are reading and miers there is a question of whether or not there was standing under that decision we believe that  penalty or statutory damages the fact is the federal law in shouldn't states be able to rely on the federal case law says steve trial court in this case here know minimum one hundred dollars had been brought into the state courts so there's nothing really unusual of the federal law being enforced in each state court that is that is the history of  so we don't know whether it's really return the case back to the circuit court for the determination there hasn't been looked at the docket there hasn't been any violence of dismissal so i can't really fully answer that question  ninety's when i remember sitting with my family for dinner and the phone rang off the hook with marking calls from about five o'clock to seven hundred and thirty and you couldn't sit there and have a conversation with your family and so that she c p a was might be different and i think that that there's a split among the circuits on that as well what if it were all the numbers and come on rd district said look here is the st six digits the last one just like in this case there's no injury there clarification they made it very clear that they were worried about abuse of lawsuits where there was no possibility of them so they made it very clear that they only wanted someone to recover where there was this possibility where there was the last five days for the expiration date full of you look at the brock opinion he had been they found that was overbroad because that could potentially if you read it literally you could prevent you from printing other information that would make the receipt useful you're handing over your personal information right off the bat right off the bat you're giving them consent as opposed and runs and runs and like it was taken with exactly without consent and surat off the bat you're giving a credit card to them that they have to have those numbers in order to charge them so you're g information and that really seems to be their intent when they talk about identity theft if they're worried about personally identifying information the st six digits aren't that they're that issue in an institution and so that's why a lot of the federal courts  that a lot easier to find me if you know the street name the number might be a little bit more difficult but the street name you know helps and so it may not be in  various is that you say that there is no privacy interest in receipt well if there's no privacy interest in a receipt and the alleged cause of action is mostly based upon an invasion of personal privacy if you have your street with a could you more easily find a yes but who are they so you have you have so much more information that you have to find now that it makes a highly plausible that these six digits could in any way ever lead to any actual in this is a private information has nothing to do with information it doesn't distinguish that it simply says you can not print more than these digits so when you do that what is the remedy for his congress created a that i mean worse we're stuck with what it says doesn't say all digits or doesn't say personal information and i agree with you it is not the most well crafted statute but nonetheless to create a right without a remedy what are we supposed to do place and i think this would be one of those instances where where where there's no injury there would be no standing under illinois and so there would be no remedy in this instance because there could be no injury because you we disagree with  perfectly clear but that would be history based upon your arguments it seems like there is no remedy at all because you're you're not only suggesting that there is no statutory remedy you're suggesting that it's impossible to establish based upon the information that the statute prohibits or or requires delimiters will not result in any harm your honor i don't think that that's exactly my argument ok that there is if the full card number and imprinted if somebody had actually suffered damage has passed the cover story about actual damages actual or actually i have a question old records of the hill that determine whether in fact this that shoot has time language within it is that the receipt has to be provided that point of sale or transaction to trigger the liability here play or some previous occasions that mindlessly throw away the with the defense says is that the judiciary should intervene and say no congress really didn't mean it what they really mean is this and here's all these other complicating things that we should really look at include logarithms don't you know that  that proper truncation of the credit card i itself as required by a factor regardless of the inclusion of the expiration date prevents it potential prosper from perpetrating identity or credit card example if you want to use the fence council's argument about the t c if you can be a phone calls at dinner will he like to shift the burden on his family to stop those calls that's the same thing here it is the business is burden and duties stop companies to say don't do it they have actual mouse in fact in page two it is an admission that they were doing it right and they just decided well we just didn't do it all this well we don't look at our receipts and that is what it is the stock is you are you know there is a