i spent the next cases alas the alaska electrical pension fund the bank of america was to conclude that porting process is to fix their flock transactions with credit suisse were somehow not real the court reached its conclusion contrary to documentary evidence and without relying on any standard factual determination yes your honor but our contention is that the just records simply ignored the evidence uncontroverted documentary that's it that's fair enough i understand that i understand that argument it's just that i thought in your brief and then as you presented you said the district court somehow misconceived the inquiry or misc it failed to understand what the settlement agreement said but the question is  all of those definitions and all those elements of the definition may either held or transacted etc etc and you keep using the word transaction correctly so the question is were there actual transactions and that's a factual question that again maybe even just a court got this completely wrong i understand that but that's the inquiry right whether the district court was clearly erred by ignoring the evidence and misinterpreting the even refer in its decision to the planet just nation that i just quoted but a little bit meaning to me i still don't see what the difference is between what the district court decided and what you just said the district court ought to have decided based on the plan of distribution and the class definition which is were there actual transactions or did your clients hold the relevant securities that's correct your honor and indeed we did are we did hold those securities and the investment monies were incredibly under our management so there were in fact and daily transactions over years as i've just described is for the counter parties to decide there's no real reason there's no certainly no record based reason for the district court to set aside or ignore the documentation that were limited documentation admittedly agreed upon between puerto bras and credit suisse as counterparts if it were what it is what it is that documentation where it would could you explain to me where there is an agreement on what it says as to what documentation would take place or how there would be a recording of actual transactions between crdit suisse and their client there's your honor those agre documents that we point to our daily confirmation e mails which basically the way that this would work your honor is that forty bras would tell credit suisse to go longer short on a daily basis based on fourt analysis of the previous days is just six rates so those were it would it would transmit what were called signals on a daily basis to credit suisse its counterparty and then credit suisse w sent a daily confirmation e mail back to horton brass and the record has we provided over one thousand one hundred such e mails between june two thousand and eight and january twenty four teams and indeed one of those emails if i may there particular instruments at three o'clock on one given afternoon how would we determine who was holding the bag at that moment who actually owned these at whose expense at the expense of investors like the ones who invested important ross you're on the rd party the party investors are the ones who lost right well your honor it's kind of a misnomer to call them sort of standing to represent the underlying pond is not true in fact some of the plaintiffs are characterized as you know money manager acts on behalf of the underlying fund but just because that we did not  well your honor what we what we've proposed to the when we originally proposed the administrator but we would still do if we were allowed to participate in this settlement was we would ourselves have a plan of distribution that we and he's proceeds that we were allocated by the question approximately what order of magnitude is your claim worth in your estimation well your honor we we we know that the the administrator or the plaintiffs and set aside something in the transactions affected by this wrongdoing of over a trillion dollars you know that's over three trillion dollars is it not for i'm sorry if i misspoke through over three trillion dollars dollars yes your honor you know which which is a very large number anywhere or really three swap transactions being done and done a day over you know several years that that is where we get the number also i understand i understand that much i understand i'm just trying to figure out approximately how much money is at issue what is what is the amount in controversy that we're fighting over here in terms of this claim it approximately i understand that it might not be possible to calculate that with precision well we've we've  asked but we haven't gotten an answer because they will not share with us what the nominal amount of all the other claimants are but well yes but look i mean look i'm pleased i'm trying to be realistic and i just want a realistic answer you folks your folks are engaged in a significant litigation money is being spent that money would not be spent unless somebody had some idea that it was worth spending and i'm just trying to i'm not asking you to commit to some number as if that's going to limit your future claims i just would like to know approximately what order of magnitude are we talking about understood your honor and i apologize for not directly answer your question the answer that question our our best estimate is that what has been set aside which is i guess in the neighborhood of thirty to thirty five million dollars and yet there was no litigation begun by fortan for us you just set back like some of these guys who are in class members who are getting one hundred dollars out of charity because it's more complicated to administer the because there are their claims are really so small but you're not here as a lead plaintiffs in this litigation or as somebody who brought th faction or took any action notwithstanding a possible claim of thirty five one million dollars that's well that bacary your honor procedurally but nonetheless the posture of the case and the plan mean i'm sorry over ten thousand claim and did did get approved for participation and only i think about one thousand four hundred got got excluded were the only ones who challenge the exclusion right  mr cunningham may i ask is there any evidence any information in the record about what is the order of magnitude of the quantum of the largest dollars in this fund right to be distributed and i just would be curious to know if there is anything in the record that says you know i'm not asking about tell me how much this particular plaintiff got but my what has been up there was a number that i believe the district court referred to as a number of all the people who got one hundred dollars right and that was twenty thousand dollars a huge number of the people who are class members and then there was a number that was i think something like sixty four thousand dollars as an average or or mean or something of some other group of claimants what is that number represents if for those distribution order represents the average across all of those claim that she filed claims that were in the didn't receive the minimum payment amount of one hundred dollars so and the number that that's how many hundreds or thousands of people are included in that average that adds up to comes up to sixty four thousand dollars i'm looking at my papers right here i apologize for not having in front of me  whatever please understand you don't waste any more of your time i'm sorry ok the claim if it were valid had to take had the potential to take guns away from class members to document suisse you know putting aside the question of why credit suisse would pay anyone to crunch hypothetical numbers that's not what we did we were in fact both an investment advisor and a counterparty for trading on the underlying investments me it shows the notional currency amounts in d the in the accountants credit suisse that is real money that investors put on the table and at risk that money was used to trade interest rate swaps as described on the right side right column of the spreadsheet the mid price shows the daily changes the investment based on the prior day's walk tree that also and these are credit suisse documents your honour's this is what i urge the plaintiffs claim that they asked credit suisse as outside counsel to look for documents but we had asked credit suisse for documents in the context of the administration in the audit and they gave us these documents they give us this spreadsheets and they gave us the daily emails numbering over  const confirms these these actual swap trades so the idea that there is no evidence of the reality of these investments is simply not true and supported by the record and for that reason we respectfully risk requests th