african americans contrary to what the a police have indicated they are not all former employees there were some who were terminated in the course of this that occasion the other three that are still employed by metra as police officers and to me out that notice pleading should be short and playing it should give notice to the defendants of the claims which are brought against them it should be a recitation of the document but over three hundred paragraphs and i was so this is still not i'm not this is still not enough i sat with my then call count and another attorney and they said let's  this should work but you know the the request for the third amendment was not not grant dismiss the second amended complaint document ember twenty two in this record which led the district judge coleman to mister and i guess the way i would characterize this i don't know whether the defendant's arguments were right or wrong some of them certainly under the railway were actually very strong but i look at the brief you filed in response to the motion to dismiss and i don't see any real legal arguments i don't see cases cited i don't see any engagement with the defendant's arguments why was it an abuse of discretion for judge coleman to treat that document as effectively a waiver of the substantive arguments that you're pursuing now ok i thought that my response to the the defendant the motion to dismiss particularly got to the railway labor act the railway labor act was not in my opinion and most of the ca considered totally dispositive of these actions they talk about the minor dispute issues i felt the issues here were more of a constitutional deprivation well that's it's pretty clear that your understanding of what's major and minor and of the real with labor act well it's under that law it's not the colloquial meaning of those terms right i understand but and i understand you may want to argue the about the merits of that now but my understanding that i needed to speak to the underlying issues and bringing the complaint before the court i was not aware as i think this is my first federal case i was not aware that i needed to at that point in gauge  discussions on case law as i did later on and the transaction i felt that the the issues to deal with the either the appropriateness of the claims the degree to which  needed to be addressed in any definitive way and that the that we were dealing with issues of how much detail i had to give in order to bring legitimate claims of either racial discrimination or retaliation or their gender or the the disability discrimination as a new practitioner in the federal court i wasn't aware that i had to argue about that quite the various case law so that that may have been and a mission on my part waiver that we did reiterate the claims and the position that we had taken with regards to the issues raised in our complain we made an effort to find co counsel i never wanted to bring this as one person a lawyer on this case but when we start to get co counsel i heard a lot of oh that's the sanctioning seven circuit we don't know that we want to do that not one  sat down with metro up and a lot apartment management and when that failed i then thought to get someone to work with me on this matter we found a wonderful lawyer that said she was excited about handling these kinds of cases and she met with the group the district court properly denied their leave to file a third amended complaint and the answer to both questions is yes the federal rules of civil procedure eighty two requires that a plaintiff's complaint include a short plain or and i apologize i do not have that right number to that document so what was missing from the second amended complaint with respect let's say to the termination identify a protected activity and which she was engaged in prior to the alleged adverse action similarly place of jackson does that allege or identify a protected activity that occurred prior to the alleged act action which was the determination and did they contain allegations that adequately tied any adverse action to racial discrimination no if we look at plaintive places also attempt to allege their respective disciplinary processes and the status circuit along with the us supreme court in hawaiian airlines have drawn a distinction in what claims are independent of a collective bargaining agreement and those claims that can be conclusively resolved by a collective bargaining agreement and the boat courts have confirmed that those that claims that can be conclusively resolved by a collective bargaining agreement are those that are preempted by the railroad labor act thirty seven point two conference to discuss the pleading deficiencies that are identified in the second amended complaint and following that plane had additional conversation with counsel regarding the pleading deficiencies prior to firing their  and when given an opportunity to defend their pleading either in response to defense defendants motion to dismiss or in oral argument before the district court the plaintiffs were still young and able to clarify the two hundred plus allegations or how the amendment or the proposed additional facts satisfy the notice pleading standard and it is at that point that the district court properly exercised discretion in denying their leave another opportunity for the plaintiffs to demonstrate the possibility of their claim and they were yet on able to do so and as reflected in judge coleman's opinion the court reviewed the record in its entirety including the third prejudice and denying their leave to file a thirty minute that would have been very helpful that did not happen also the defendants talked about a rule or open letter i saw the rule eleven letter for the first time as an attachment to the motion to dismiss i never received a rule eleven letter prior to that and the record reflects that the district court that that case there was no conference between the plaintiff and the appellant something to do with concerns about deficiencies in the complaint that would have been very helpful if to change that would have been very helpful to me if there had been the face to face with in a telephone conference i think this needs to happen that needs to go away to go away we end the thirty minute the complaint we did remove the language check and do with the illinois civil but we recognize the fact that the railway labor act is not exclusive remedy here the railway labor act deals with collective bargaining it is more arbitration and more collective bargaining and or agreement but we were dealing with more serious issues the r act hearing you know before you go into the hearing that you're going to be terminated because they told you before the hearing that you're going to be terminated this was a matter that needed to go outside of that parameter and into the court the the