morning good morning your honor good morning your honor sir if it so please the court i peer here again before the same how will judges argue as i did successfully in the house a wanderer case that determined that the military failed in its judy's hundred ten u s c fifteen fifty two again i argued has done the same today to borrow from this panel's decision and hausa longer the board of corrections has been sanctioned to quote determine in so far as possible to come a sure of the alleged injustice and to take steps to grant thorough and fitting relief and quote at its principal function is to quote correct an injustice clearly presented why why is this case here new case law doesn't make that sort of distinction power if you look at the underlying case law of sorry the underlying statute that brings this matter here it is ten u s c fifteen fifty two what we're trying to do here is make sure that the our sister corps it i believe it was under for going to her sister court were had been argued that the party was asking for attorney's fees which may exceed but we don't believe that it's actually a little tucker big talker because again we're not asking primarily for money we're primarily asking for his records to be corrected that the agency acted arbitrati removal of an o th or other than honorable discharge to an honorable discharge or medical discharge we're asking that his disability rating be given a ten percent if not higher for his military medical discharge none of those things that i've just listed with the exception of the records correction in of itself is something that this court can grant and the any veteran should not be penalized whether it's now before as he files the complaint or later after the fact that he's trying to get the benefits that the military said well you never asked for the plane but if there is an issue of money then the lark or how the responsibility to split the matter remove the money issue to the court of claims and resolve the a p a action here coeur says that the united states court of appeals for the federal short circuit shall have exclusive jurisdiction of an appeal from a district court granting or denying in whole or in part a motion to transfer the action to the i'm sorry did i mishear you did you not to say that this court does have that jurisdiction oh no it's the united states the appeal from the motion to to deny transfer should have been taken to the court of appeals for the federal quote granting plaintiff appropriate back pay and benefits that would naturally flow from the upgrade in discharge status discussed in the previous paragraphs so the plaintiff does request monetary relief this court has repeatedly held  there's no case that i found that splits those issues i am all of the cases hold that if the if the talker act is implicated it needs to be in a court of federal claims and and then the federal circuit and even the a p a claim that's correct the whole thing goes to the that's correct i'd like to just step back and note that as your honour's have made clear in your question there are two separate issues in this case first there's the question of whether the district court had jurisdiction over the complaint as currently written and second there's the question of whether the court was correct and the federal circuit is empowered to correct records and remained to the agency as needed and in addition to granting the monetary relief that the pla and therefore it doesn't restart th decision on the murders that's correct your honor it's worth noting that in this case the federal circuit has already held the mr class as its claims and our time mark in the federal circuit yes you're correct there are no further questions w i'll take those no  moment but i do think we need to know from again our sister circuit and pool it would be damaging to justice and to respect for the non monetary concerns of our offices for this court to hold that plaintiffs claim for individually of his conviction and discharge our mass for a subsequent claim for monetary relief at least as important as that pay our a man's career his livelihood his rights as a veteran his status as a convicted criminal and his reputation i argue that those benefits are all stuff that flow from chris down from the records courses and we are asking for records for our actions we should not be penalized because we want to make sure that we have everything that naturally flows from does this mean that if i don't ask fees in the matter that i will be denied attorney's fees in this particular case how the how is saying jurisdictions in the federal circuit penalize i think choice of words no no no i'm not saying that penalizes me that one specifically didn't have any money benefits to it to benefit it and that's the entire issue that's a little to one the whole point is when you put in your complaint that you want back pay that's money that's tucker we don't do tucker correct it's that simple you haven't penalize your prize i mean penalize you saying no congress has said these types of claims belong in a different court for very good reasons but i don't believe the court could actually point need any