facts because they i say that they really control the case if they're if passenger delta airlines was imprisoned by delta ever in saying that different mediums of the world control and that would work said but my argument is not that control with different meanings it's different my argument is goes to the issue that here we're dealing with a continuing violation that could continue for yes yes so i've had trouble finding precedents that tell me what to do with a continuing toward so it begins in a location at a place and with control in circumstances that even you seem to concede would fall within the convention and therefore be question is the nature of the tour manifests itself in a way in which the only thing that changes is that the reason for having sees the person doesn't change in the eyes of delta they still want to hold him they just physically have now taken him to a new location and time is passed until some of the warty can get there get hold of the person the very argument seems to be because of that we should view it as all unified and anchored it's the beginning you're saying no we can look at it each moment and it becomes a magical moment when he's now no longer plausibly said to be disembarking and two temporal phases of the court did exactly that and one more thing it's if you look at the local mall d which we say applies to us at least to be element of liability no i mean it probably comes a time when you sort of write a lot of these factors and say well maybe too much but why the logic of your position i don't think admits of that limitation on it which doesn't mean it's wrong it's just i don't see how the position you're taking which starts with the key point that he was ordered to stay when he was on the play and never left their control because of something to happen on the plane if the ideas that's the accident that's correct  that if that's one position for what in the word accident precludes us from reading accident to take account of it being a continuing violation and that even though there was a seizure at that point there's also a seizure every other moment and the seizure we're looking at in the claim that's now before us is the seizure that occurred thirty minutes moment the claim seeks to get them to destroy it that's uniform to everybody and if it's thirty minutes later four hundred dollars yards away put it this way suppose here was wondering down the hallway it happened to be right next to the room no one ever said anything to me left the plane over it great having on the flight he walks down the hall forty yards away took him a half hour to get there he's right in front of that room all of a sudden a delta employee runs up to him and said they just told me you stole the briefcase go in that room ok at that moment they'd have control over him he'd be four hundred yards away it would be a half hour later would you is by saying that because it was seized early on it doesn't matter how much longer away it is or how far even though there would be no claim that he was disembarking if you was seized for the st time  they had to try to figure out whether we can be a portable portable plane or something or something else and they came up with back raids so it was more than just traveling from here there is your i didn't if suppose they ordered him to stay on the plane and they actually never our control this instinctively into trying with all of the other elements that they have to just say once control occurs in a situation in which time the location also point towards it being an accident because they want to make sure that he gets into the right hands correct so from that perspective is there any definition i can look to about what a typical accident it's over a negligent type thing a slip and fall those type of things you wouldn't have this issue of the continuation of the torque the continuing torque is likely to be intentional i would imagine if it is a legitimate issue it might possibly inform how we would interpret all of this so it's not i guess it's not entirely off the table but thank you thank you  satisfied in the worth of this court his physical separation from the aircraft's is this even a close case that should even involve the offer of element of a trial thank you