today before we start our oral arguments i have the distinct pleasure of moving for admissions to the federal circuit my three and i for that purpose when i make the motion judgment will take over the gavel the three applicants and movement are already jo california david price who is a member of the bar in good standing of the highest court of california geoffrey she was a member of a bar in good standing the highest court of massachusetts which means that they passed the bar exam and are in good standing that in that regard it's you know this is this case is a little frustrating in the sense that here we are the second time addressing this question of attorneys fees and we normally those things merits at least as i understand i'm also a little frustrated in the sense that on on the one hand it seems to me that judge reels actions were  quite arbitrary on the other hand he was a little bit more specific this time around at least with respect to samsung and did identify a number of things that several of which as a judge pros pointed out you haven't even challenged and in your reply i noticed in the appendix whatever response you filed in the district court to those specific itemized  issues with respect to samsung your reply in the appendix consisted of the first page and the signature page and note nothing in between so we're left without we're left without the argument  so it seems to me on the one hand believe got an action that is had some thinking anyway some thought some consideration and on the other  thousand one hundred twenty five dollars and seventeen cents come that was his award and where where did that come from that what should we look to to assess whether his actions were arbitrary or reasonable fact we have to dig the wreckage up and take a look at all of the bills and statements were submitted and determine whether or not they were considered by the lower court when he has no reference to the record specifically that he relied upon  ninety six million dollars at risk and a finding of contempt one thing to be on the on the offensive side and it's another to be on the deep sense of that  contractual agreement to shift c s so you don't start from zero seems to me you start with the ts that we're actually building pay and then work from there and look at whether those fees for reasonable are not reasonable and i question is why wasn't that done in this case and is it or perhaps i should restate it's a question the question to me is why wasn't done in this case and understanding to be able to defend that is a reasonable fee you can just pluck a number out of the air and say this is reasonable based on my fifty years of legal experience judges that if he presided over not what is reasonable about the nine fees where new apply for sure if you apply for a short petition and they opposed it they spent forty eight thousand dollars in opposing that search petition judge real and said that they s basis of objecting to legal fees at that point time when you put show it to the final degree is that part of the same ca action and if that action includes in part a petition or search warrant to the supreme court why is that any different than the appeal to this court or any of the proceedings that the district court what legal authority is necessary and what reason we covered one over a million two hundred thousand dollars that's not reasonable that's a very reasonable a contains the attorney's signature is that normal in central circuit in the central district kno