here i mean there was never the current tory judgement that heard so far as i can tell proposed but never enter all we basically have is summary judgment granted yes that is not  the declaratory judgment so what are we what do we actually review yes but we also had a cross motion for summary judgment and the thing is that the judge although she did not issue th declaration before the judge after the judgment she asked after the appeal was was entered the thing is that her findings are a romeo and they and these findings the problem is that they are revisiting some matters that were already in the state decided by the state court you know we don't review findings we're supposed to review apparently a judgment and again i do not know what that  i understand that but if this court term means that the foundation for that summary judgment entered is the iranians then there's no declaration needed because that's exactly the position of battery and asked in its cross motion for summary judgment because there's there were two motions for summary judgment what's what's preventing you from getting the change of title with the red nothing nothing that is exactly what happened because we filed in two thousand and eighteen after the c f i's judgement you thought you had a motion to dismiss their claim for declaratory judgment or summary judgment and now the district and you lost on the yes ok they move for what they move for a declaration and what did she do with gable's which were the tenants about it asked i'm sorry to interrupt you but just rather than describing it in narrative terms just technical legal terms sure the you got a summary our perspective we don't have options we just have jurisdiction limitations so there's no fifty four b there is piecemeal how can that be final i mean there's no argument as to how it can be a final judgment to appeal from given the posture the case arises because you have pieces of the rulings below one of which you're appealing the other which is not resolved ok and no certification as to why it can go up as just happened in the not setting we just don't have authority t whether you have the inference that i get from their argument is that because of could you just answer if we have jurisdiction you see the argument is there anything i know that would give us at this moment there is nothing final the order has been you're an opinion was issued a judgment was issued and the declaratory relief what we thought that we filed is pending before the as your opponent points out you submitted these documents to the registrar which you purported to understand exactly what the district court's decision made that probably gave you everything that you wanted even explaining to answer just as question because correct you took the lower court's decision to mean something important enough to you to interfere with the prices over there in the registry which in what counsel said about it taking years to go through something else is going on over there i assume relative to what you find out from the federal court and my explanation will go into church with that sense as requested i answer property has to look in passing judgment on those documents that are presented it's not any media inscription of those documents in the records they have to look at the documents to see if they meet their requirement  one is she has to rule on the document that was filed by buying a house in the registry the register has two options one is either to record or to notify would be fax the registered has notified my document with the facts so i'm sorry i didn't understand your question sorry the district court made a summary judgment ruling in your favor correct does it make any other ruling in anybody's favor just on are denied their cross waiting for the district court to do anything further in order for you to real complex what you want to accomplish with the registry we're currently handing the issuance of the declaration from the district court and while you're waiting for that  is it your view that you cannot succeed in what you're trying to accomplish with the registry intil that declaration is issued it is the interpretation of the register of those do do you have something pending with the registry and right now is it your view that the rich have you and what you presented to the registry are you presenting it as just what we've given you would be enough for you to rule for us or is it that was told to the previous document was notified and the previous document i believe is the from from the information that i got over the email system was the previous document yet notified they got notified is it aware that there is a pending request for a declaration at the territory judgement no you are i would assume that she is not there or he's not aware of that  registrar which seemed to reflect what was not in fact true that you got the declaratory judgment that you wanted how up how could you presume to do that do i have the sequence wrong if you don't specific we told you she entered she entered summary judgment for you and said now submitted to propose propose the substance of the declaratory judgment that you want you dead that which inform the register that there was an issue regarding our rights in the district so you filed the judge's actual written we filed as a copy the order and opinion and the judgment and we made reference in the document to that opinion and order just as a statement saying there was something in the district court with the petition normally a petition you will be hearing from us again and in the meantime let's to meet you really are the registry like mice or at the time the registry will probably just be sitting on this until somebody does something correctly because they said that you should have appealed your denial of intervention and that they gave you a proposed remedy to start a new in the st instance the suppose the question is ok that's i'm sure that's part of the record this is the the state supreme court's record that's part of the record in the registry the supreme court did not deny dysart petition what the court of appeals indicated in that order that you're referring to was that they had no jurisdiction to go three in regards to that that was it was denied by the court of st instance abel's didn't follow through from my recollection is that was one registry regarding the properties that they own in the registry that's what dublin capital attacked this is wait a minute our mortgages are still alive and we still have rights under the pursuing that told you what you should do she doing what you know the way you were trying to challenge it under puerto rico law did not work but they actually told you but you could do to challenge the judgment but you that right well we were never part of the award process used it not so they said with a clear procedure that you could follow i think is that it should you choose to do so you didn't do that and independent action to you to ask for a remedy regarding our rights which is what we did in the in the district court you think that's what the puerto rico court had in mind that you should file that action in federal court you think that's what they had in mind your honor i don't know what but you have already filed that that that suit was already underway at the time you got that advice from that that federal lawsuit was already underway was it not when you got it was already underway correct right so that was not a response to the advice from the puerto rico court of appeals right that was not a response to the but you might if i guessed being charitable you might have thought effectively we're doing exactly what they said because this is the independent action under diversity jurisdiction we're allowed to bring in federal court or state court if we have a diversity jurisdiction that was one of the in the same s yes on the fifty four dollars b issue and whether there is jurisdiction for our court of over any of this is it possible for us to treat what the district court did  making clear that she wanted us to rule on the summary judgment motion prior to the declaratory judgment was because i take it she made that clear as an indicative ruling that she would grant a rule fifty four b certification ms or some way asked for final judgment and writ of execution in order to even consider the of the remedies they were asking because they did not only so many in the opinion in order they were requesting them representation under oath to the registry prior to that only sees me they made under oath that they were entitled to those remedies that they had asked in summ bit because you could win on the merits and you know as a matter of discretion she could not grant exactly if i'm understanding what everybody is saying if she were to proceed in that way it's possible that you would not because even though you would have lost in the summary judgment motion they wouldn't get what they need to get the kind of action by any state official that were well it depends because they are arguing i know they're of all the liens that were to be canceled and that and the court is each has issued those those things so those things are going to be those are going to be canceled in the registry what they're asking the remedies they're asking it seems to me not at all clear that it makes sense to permit the appeal to go forward until the lower court has made the judgment as to whether as a matter of discretion they'd actually well i don't think it's an issue that she's going to issue it because she issued the judgment that that's where we appealed and and she actually stated that she had a case and controversy and we also addressed that in our brief and i have to say to both of you in addition to not addressing this critical interlocutory appeal fifty four b issue which my colleagues have pointed out i mean there is a very large underline issue we have the prospect of not the reality you know of these competing judgments and the state court and the federal court that's a very difficult issue and none of you have really acknowledge that or dealt with it and frankly i don't understand how you could not understand the significance of that issue and just pretend that it's not there you just sort of want to weigh in on your respective narrow grounds that's a very large issue which nobody you are my life nobody here satisfactorily addressed but for me a lease is off all the more reason why we need to proceed very carefully here and send this back to the to the district court because we do we do not have jurisdiction over this appeal contention all the way that the c f i had to be respected given full faith and credit and by finding that was a case and controversy here  does run a state court that just resolve the issue a bit of certain parties but it can't resolve their rights as the potential subrogate with just let's see they gave them they'd they bought a mortgage that was based on on a contract and the contract specifically stated that if for whatever reason the lease wholly interest was finished especially when it was by a default of the tenant their property would that had that in the its contract to agreement with the lease holder they're just out of luck exactly and so that means the no liens and encumbrances is does that mean that someone irrelevant to this case you know it's completely they are not amenable that many is not the number to them well ok i am troubled by something that was probably the district court i mean the it does seem that in the the the state court proceedings interests by following procedures and that that's that's an issue that would have to be addressed but the suggestion that the arbitration awards the confirmation of it somehow resolve their thank you all right